Kristy, you have spotted the problem, no clear acceptance of any one standard when it comes to 4wd tracks. And while its being done a number of different ways (or not done at all) we have little chance of getting the rendering people to listen to us.
In western Europe, little interest, complete lack of understanding of the need. The US does have some great 4wd tracks but they are more recreational in nature, you go somewhere, drive a great track and then go home. They also don't understand our model of using these tracks to get to somewhere really interesting ! Asia, (far) eastern Europe, get it but don't seem to want to support the ideas. I believe (strongly) we need a multi level tag that indicates a track is somewhere between "a bit dodgy" right through to "Oh wow". That, by its very nature means its subjective, you and I might well disagree with at what stage a typical SUV and inexperienced driver should be warned off. We cannot help that, 4wds are all different, drivers are different in their skills and willingness to take risks. The 4wd_only tag is 'official' and was a good try. But not used very much outside of Oz. And its a yes/no and life is never a yes/no situation. Further, so much OSM data ends up in a psql database, one column per tag. Believe it or not, psql does not like having column names start with numerals. It can be worked around but I suspect that's one reason mapnik (or more correctly, its slippery map) won't show 4wd_only. I prefer an extension to the tracktype= tag, its already widely used internationally and, somewhat, rendered on the slippery map. We can add three more levels to it (grade6, grade7, grade8) being "possibly not suitable for conventional car", "4wd stuff" and "4wd extreme". I currently use both 4wd_only= and tracktype= But I would support any new, sufficiently flexible proposal. I don't really this a physical meet up is necessary, be surprised if we could agree on a convienant location ! David . Kristy Van Putten <kristy.vanput...@gmail.com> wrote: >Hi Matt, >I think your conclusions is right, that we need to put an Australian standard >together. It sounds like the ground work has been done (maybe even multiple >times) but there has not been a clear acceptance of any particular schema. > >How do you think we should go forward with this? My suggestion is that we >make a weekend of it, where we come together - where there are plenty of >different types of 4WD tracks - and try and test the schema already made. I >know I am still living outside of the country, so for me this maybe hard over >the next couple of months. I am home in July for a couple of weeks and I am >sure I could convince someone to lend me a 4WD. However it is winter, so it >won't be the warmest weather! Maybe we could wait till summer? > >Would anyone be keen? > >Cheers > > > >On 06/05/2013, at 4:22 PM, Matt White <mattwh...@iinet.com.au> wrote: > >> I'm also very interested in 4wd trails - it's what 80% of my mapping >> consists of I think (that, and house numbers in the inner north of Melbourne) >> >> The current 4wd_only tag was one of the tags I proposed a few years ago - >> there was a massive barney at the time over the smoothness=* and surface=* >> tags, and all I wanted to do was mark roads that were clearly tagged as 4wd >> only (proper 4wd as in low range, high clearance). The surface/smoothness >> debate was interesting, but got in the way of the larger problem. >> >> I've come to the conclusion that the Australian mappers pretty much have to >> go it alone in this area - what the Americans and Europeans call a 4wd track >> would be a national highway for us (and we actually have a few legitimate >> highways and primary roads that are 4wd/seasonal closure type roads. I'm not >> a massive fan of the tracktype=* tag - it's a random number that is too >> subjective. >> >> There was an attempt in Victoria a while ago to class various tracks around >> the place as 4wd - the DSE/Parks Vic had a program where various 4wd club >> members were trained in what constituted an green, blue, black and double >> black road (very ski-trail), and got people out mapping that, but it all >> went to pot when it turned out that the DSE/Parks Vic guys were taking those >> results from the 4wd guys, and then either closing the roads to management >> vehicles only, or grading them so they were rated green. Pretty soon after >> that, the 4wd clubs got suitably annoyed, and stopped supporting the >> initiative. >> >> To the best of my knowledge, we still don't have a decent "subject to >> seasonal closure" tagging schema either - believe that Liz was at one time >> proposing something, but I think she's given up on OSM post license change. >> >> I'd be more than happy to help put together an AU only/AU based 4wd mapping >> set of rules and tags that we can use - if we can agree on something, I can >> also mod the hi-res/4wd maps I crank out for the Garmin devices to suit, and >> possibly even learn the Mapnik rendering stuff to implement the rendering >> side in Mapnik (seeing as DIY often appears as the only way the renderer >> gets changed). I wrote up some surface tagging concepts ages ago I thought >> might fly for handling the surface issue for 4wd tracks, as well as some >> general rules for tagging roads (eg: when off the beaten track, it's >> critical to mark the entire stretch of road as 4wd only or similar if there >> are no turns you can make to get off the road - often once you are on a 4wd >> road, you tend to be committed to going forwards...) >> >> Matt >> >> On 1/05/2013 10:28 AM, David Bannon wrote: >>> On Tue, 2013-04-30 at 16:29 +0700, kristy van putten wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> ...... has anyone thought of 4WD trails in OSM? I would also be keen >>>> to find out if there are any Ozzy teaching OSM to schools or scout >>>> groups etc? >>> Kristy, I have a particular interest in 4wd trails and OSM. I am >>> particularly concerned how 4wd roads are recorded and typically >>> displayed. The difficulty is that we all seem to use a range of >>> standards and generally, the rendering people ignore them all. Perhaps >>> not unreasonably. >>> >>> Just before christmas, I lead a bit of a campaing to get some clear >>> standards in place for defining 4wd tracks, the idea being, consistent >>> with OSM guidelines, that highway= be used to signify the purpose of the >>> road and tags such as tracktype= be used to describe the likely state >>> its in. Tracktype= already has grade1 to grade5 but 4wd tracks, needed, >>> IMHO 6,7 and 8. Sadly, while everyone agreed something needed to be >>> done, I did not see enough support for that idea to get past the OSM >>> voting model. It therefore just a recommendation on >>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Roads_Tagging >>> >>> 4wd_only is another option, it is at least official. However, it has >>> only one 'level' and apparently the rendering community don't like tags >>> that begin with a numeral, makes postqress column names messy. >>> >>> Trouble is that much of europe and the US don't really understand 4wd >>> tracks/roads, unless there is a widely used stand way of describing >>> them, the renderers will ignore it, mapers won't see any results and >>> won't bother. The poor old motorist will find themselves in serious >>> trouble every now and again ! >>> >>> David >>> >>>> >>>> Looking forward to talking to you all >>>> Cheers >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> >>>> >>>> Kristy Van Putten >>>> >>>> Spatial Analyst, Data Manager >>>> >>>> Australia-Indonesia Facility Disaster Reduction >>>> >>>> Mb: +62 811 987 573 >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Talk-au mailing list >>>> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org >>>> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Talk-au mailing list >>> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org >>> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Talk-au mailing list >> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org >> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au > > >_______________________________________________ >Talk-au mailing list >Talk-au@openstreetmap.org >http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au _______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
