First, most of the people using presets (JOSM or ID) don't read the
wiki. Tags have to be self-explanatory as much as possible.
And even if you explain that smoothness=excellent is for roller
blade, I know skaters that could use smoothness=good ways easily.
And I'm still waiting some
So I have some thoughts on smoothness…
It’s not a terrible tag. I think if we just replace “usable by” with “suitable
for” on the wiki, it would be a bit better. We all know that it’s certainly
*possible* to take a road bike or inline skates down a pile of rocks, (I do it
myself too). That
2014-09-01 14:51 GMT+02:00 Pieren pier...@gmail.com:
I would also like to see at least one application using it, if any.
For example I use it in my small project -
https://github.com/mkoniecz/bicycle_map_of_Krakow
There are some sidewalks with allowed cycling but completely decayed paving
As somebody who participates in at least two outdoor activities in which
road conditions are an important comfort factor* (inline skating and
riding a road bike) it would be great to have a reasonably reliable
indication of what to expect on a certain road segment additionally to
the pure
On 31.08.2014 08:28, Simon Poole wrote:
At best the extreme values are meaningful and I would suggest that the
value space at least be reduced (something along the lines of good, bad,
impassable) in any preset.
You may be right in principle, but I feel it is not our job to make such
a drastic
The tag smoothness is vague and subjective only if we define it as such.
Values excellent and bad can be treated as placeholders, and we can
define them on the wiki as anything we like and then expect mappers to use
them according to that definition, and not solely by that one string.
If you ask
I don't think anybody was complaining about the words used for values
per se, they will still be good for a chuckle in 20 years from now.
However the wiki definition of how the values should be determined is
simply FUBAR, and in no way defines each value pretty good. There is
no point in
A last try at illustrating the insanity of the smoothness definitions.
Switzerland has an extensive network of signposted inline skating
routes, including the world longest single route at something around
400km (see http://skating.waymarkedtrails.org/en/ ). For readers that
have never used
On 31 August 2014 10:50, Janko Mihelić jan...@gmail.com wrote:
we can define them on the wiki as anything we like and
then expect mappers to use them according to that
definition
I'd like to see some evidence for that; or indeed that most mappers
refer to the wiki (even indirectly) at all.
On 31/08/2014, Simon Poole si...@poole.ch wrote:
As somebody who participates in at least two outdoor activities in which
road conditions are an important comfort factor* (inline skating and
riding a road bike) it would be great to have a reasonably reliable
indication of what to expect on a
On 31 August 2014 10:50, Janko Mihelić jan...@gmail.com wrote:
If you ask me, the table at this url:
http://wiki.osm.org/wiki/Key:smoothness#Smoothness
defines each value pretty good.
It seems from that, that the real purpose of this tag is to record the
type of terrain of unpaved paths,
Hi,
there have been requests to include the tag smoothness=* in the JOSM
presets [1]. Everywhere the user can fill in surface=*, we would add an
additional option for smoothness=*. Apart from the value (excellent,
good, ...) we would include the explanation from the wiki into the
selection
On 30 August 2014 12:54, Paul Hartmann phaau...@gmail.com wrote:
there have been requests to include the tag smoothness=* in the JOSM presets
[1]. Everywhere the user can fill in surface=*, we would add an additional
option for smoothness=*. Apart from the value (excellent, good, ...) we
would
2014-08-30 13:54 GMT+02:00 Paul Hartmann phaau...@gmail.com:
Hi,
there have been requests to include the tag smoothness=* in the JOSM
presets [1]. Everywhere the user can fill in surface=*, we would add an
additional option for smoothness=*. Apart from the value (excellent, good,
...) we
I agree with Mateusz
Volker
On 30 August 2014 18:01, Mateusz Konieczny matkoni...@gmail.com wrote:
2014-08-30 13:54 GMT+02:00 Paul Hartmann phaau...@gmail.com:
Hi,
there have been requests to include the tag smoothness=* in the JOSM
presets [1]. Everywhere the user can fill in
We are supporting `smoothness` in iD. Now as of a month ago, we display
friendlier (and translatable) text descriptions for these kinds of dropdown
fields. (e.g. sac_scale, track type, trail_visibility, etc)
When I added these last month, I did borrow heavily from the descriptions on
the
Il giorno 30/ago/2014, alle ore 14:46, Andy Mabbett
a...@pigsonthewing.org.uk ha scritto:
I doubt three mappers would
always agree on which to use for a given place.
I think complete agreement is not necessary, it would be sufficient if it were
+-1, similar to road classification with
I also agree with Mateusz. I would like to see use of the smoothness tag
become more universal so building it into a JOSM preset sounds like a good
idea.
However, as others have said, the topic has had much discussion but little
agreement on exactly how to determine the value. A highway that has
18 matches
Mail list logo
