Alex Mauer wrote: > Sounds like the usage is wrong “round there” then. The example image on > the wiki[1] clearly shows a road > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Fr%C3%BChlingslandschft_Aaretal_Schweiz.jpg
I think if you described that as a "road" in the UK you'd have the Trades Descriptions people onto you pretty sharpish. Maybe this explains why our newspapers get so over-excited when satnavs direct us down bumpy, inhospitable things and claim they're "roads". That would be described only as a "track" here. But it doesn't matter. There is simply no need to fiddle in this way. The situation is just as it was last time Gorm tried to enforce his own idea of tag tidiness (http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2010-November/054639.html); again, this change achieves nothing and is at risk of breaking plenty, including every mkgmap .img based on its default styles. A cursory glance suggests Britain appears to have more highway=unsurfaced than other places, and even then there aren't that many. I will happily fix 200 of them _properly_ (i.e. with what the track actually is, not the cop-out of highway=road) if someone creates a rendering to highlight where they are. cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/highway-unsurfaced-tp5904655p5908118.html Sent from the General Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk