I consider the definitions quite reasonable for this tag. Yes,there is a degree of subjectiveness there,there has to be given what it is trying to do. Honestly, we really need to got over this dread fear of being subjective. Not everything can be measured in integer numbers, great when it can be but accept it when what is being described is, by its nature, difficult.
So I'd vote to remove the "controversy" section, but perhaps to move it to discussion for historical purposes. Dave S, I think the suggestion of measuring such things using accelerometers was someones sarcastic attempt to show the tag is about as good as it can get. Now, having said that, i don't use the tag because the names used are "horrible". Firstly, "smoothness" itself is not the only issue and the values ?? I live on a road I'd have to call very bad ? No way ! David jgpacker <john.pack...@gmail.com> wrote: >Hi, >I saw in the wiki page Key:smoothness ><http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:smoothness#Controversy> that there >is a section about the controversy over it's verifiability. > >As far as I remember, this tag was throughly discussed here until a >consensus was achieved (which was that it should be classified according to >how usable the road is/which kinds of modes of transportation can use it). > >Is this claim over it's verifiability still current? > >I think it's not, and that this claim should be removed from the page >(though it may be useful to write a section with a brief history of this >key). > >Cheers, >John > > > >-- >View this message in context: >http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/Current-status-of-the-key-smoothness-tp5836692.html >Sent from the Tagging mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > >_______________________________________________ >Tagging mailing list >Tagging@openstreetmap.org >https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
