On Sat, Aug 28, 2010 at 2:40 AM, Andy Allan <gravityst...@gmail.com> wrote: > Then mark the reasons it's not suitable. We have this same discussion > with cycling (in fact, Peter Miller had an entire presentation on this > issue at SOTM09 - he just suggested the wrong solution :-) ). One > persons "unsuitable for motorcycles" is another person's fun and > games. So if the problem is that there are steps, then mark the steps. > If the problem is that there's a massive chasm with a log over it, > then mark bridge=yes width=0.25m surface=log maxweight=150kg (or > similar!). Mark the stepping stones as stepping stones. > > In short, mark the facts that lead you to think it's not suitable, and > leave the judgement to the producers of the map as to what they think > is appropriate for their particular audience.
This solution sounds appealing, but is totally impractical. Recording the information you cite is orders of magnitude more work than recording a simple yes/no. It's probably too late for any useful solution to arise, but I think it's possible to define sensible meanings for "suitable". I ride a bike, and I'm perfectly capable of distinguishing between what's suitable for a road bike, a hybrid, or what is really a mountain biking path. You could easily have a scheme like: bicycle=no mtb=yes Meaning, "this is not a practical way for the average cyclist to travel". Moreover, even with all the information you suggest tagging, I honestly don't even know what the end user would do with it all. Something somewhere has to boil it down to a yes/no. Your GPS isn't going to deal with it, so the logic has to be up stream. By far the best person to make a judgment call is the person who mapped it. A path that sounds perfectly suitable for cycling due to its tags might turn out to be crap for all kinds of reasons: slippery roots, blackberries, poor drainage, lots of blind corners, boardwalks with wide gaps aligned with the tyres. So you could end up mapping "highway=path; bicycle=yes; width=1; surface=dirt;" in great detail, and totally miss the fact it's unrideable. Steve _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
