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 doesn’t mean the map should suggest a person actually try it just because we insist on sticking to a very *literal* definition of “usable by". Try to think of people with wheelchairs, strollers, little kids on a bike with training wheels, etc.
The text descriptions make sense to me. The pictures can be improved, and I’m happy to help with that — I have good pictures of all the different smoothness types. How should I proceed with this, just make the change? Thanks, Bryan On Sep 1, 2014, at 8:51 AM, Pieren <pier...@gmail.com> wrote: > 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 clarifications between "very_bad" and > "horrible"... We also had long discussions about reducing/simplifying > the list of values... > I would also like to see at least one application using it, if any. > >> I am not really happy about it, but I was unable to invent something better >> and it >> not as bad as say maxspeed:practical. > Do we have to choose between bad and worse ? > As already mentionned, the skater, biker or car driver will have a > totally different idea/view of what a "good" or "bad" smoothness is > for his means of transport. > > Pieren > > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
