the problem with having a tag only for a very specific type of travellers (e.g. the "how easy is this to travel with a bicycle with 26 inch slick tyres that cruises at 30mph" proposal) is what density of such people will be available to tag the roads?
e.g. anyone can tag that a path is "1.5 meters wide with a concrete surface and a cattle-grid at each end" - those are physical descriptions that don't require specialised knowledge. but very few people would be able to tag that it's "excellent/good/average/poor" for traversing with a road bike, a wheelchair, a flock of cows, an amphibious bus, or a ferrari without any ground clearance, since that requires experience in using the various forms of transport that the road is being evaluated for the use of... e.g. see how many of "NickW's number 4 type of track" have been tagged outside the New Forest - you might just find that very subjective tags like this will disappear as you leave the home region of whoever proposed them... On Thu, May 8, 2008 at 7:19 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > OJ W wrote: >> How about this discussion... >> >> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Routing_profiles >> >> >> I tried some bike routing with pyroute and it seemed fairly happy >> choosing residential roads around town. The only real change for >> fragile bikes would be that it's difficult to tell whether >> "highway=cycleway" is a suitable route. >> >> Perhaps we could start by saying that highway=cycleway is only >> routeable by road bikes if it also contains surface=sealed or >> surface=tarmac. >> > > Oh, i missed that discussion on routing profiles ... > > The remark of Sven Anders shows that you can't simply derive the cycle > quality from given structural properties of the road. However, the > heuristics you propose will produce good results in many cases, but there > is no way to tweak it, when it does not. > > The cycle quality of a road is highly subjective. And racing bike quality > maybe something else than commuter bike quality. > > But if you ask a racing bike user, he can certainly tell you, if a street > he rode was good or even excellent, or if he didn't liked it (=poor) or if > he feared for his life (=avoid). > > > I belive that there is no need for a finer grade scale. If you plan a route > you will try to use good or excellent roads. Poor road will only be used to > get from one good road to another good one. > > > In the other mails in this thread it is discussed, if tagging racing bike > quality can be done by everyone. (so far as i understood the mails). > > > I belive that only people who are aware of the special needs of road racers > can tag racing bike quality "correctly". But those people will also be the > only users of that information! > > Ari wrote: >> When I think of it, why categorically restrict grading only to features >> that everybody can grade (relatively) "correctly" after just having a >> look at the tagging description? Quickly thinking this seems to me like >> an unnecessary limitation to OSM. If a tag that requires more knowledge >> would be usefull for a certaing group of users, why not let it to be >> used? Everybody doesn't *have to* tag anything. Again, an appropriate >> warning of the required level of knowledge might be used in the >> instruction. > > Will tagging the special needs of a small group of users be ok for the osm > community, or will my racing bike tags be removed by someone else? > > Regards > Gerriet > > _______________________________________________ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk > _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
