Paul Johnson <ba...@ursamundi.org> writes: > On Fri, 2009-09-04 at 07:30 -0400, Greg Troxel wrote: > >> It depends on what the road is like. If it's a decent dirt road that >> normal cars routinely drive on, has a street name, is considered a >> public or private way by the town, then it's highway=residential >> surface=unpaved. >> >> If when driving on it in a car you wince and wish you had a 4WD truck, >> it doesn't a name, and it isn't recognized as a 'real road', it might be >> highway=track. > > How are you coming to that conclusion, anyway? Also, show me an unpaved > residential street in the western US that you didn't wish you had a 4WD > for, and I'll show you a street that really is paved, but hasn't been > swept or had rain wash the dirt off all summer.
Also, my point is that "highway=residential surface=unpaved" implies a very different legal status (a bit like "public right of way" in the UK), and connotes 'real road'. highway=track, on the other hand, seems definitely second-class, as in farm or logging road that doesn't have legal status. In other words, highway=residential surface=unpaved is a road that can have an address of someone's house. if someone lives on a track, their address will be a value on the real road the track connects to. Here is a Mass example (Kingland Road): http://osm.org/go/ZfIYetHlg-?layers=B000FTTT A western example: http://osm.org/go/t...@alk--?layers=b000fttt Mormon Row is highway=unclassified, surface=gravel. I drove this in a nissan versa and that seems quite reasonable. Do you think a road having legal status is important in deciding between the two alternatives in question? If not, please explain why not. _______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
