On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 11:18 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer <dieterdre...@gmail.com> wrote: > 2011/1/12 Anthony <o...@inbox.org>: >> As I said, highway=road is not defined as "unknown classification", it >> is defined as "a road of unknown classification". > > > IMHO that's just a bad definition, because if you don't know the way, > how could you know that it is a road (see also the aussie example of > cycleway vs. unpaved road)?
I agree it's a bad definition (I think my last post explained that in detail), but you certainly could see a road, but not know what class of road it is. > And which should be the classification of an unknown path? highway=path > What exactly does > "highway" mean in spoken language? Does "highway=path" make any sense? > Tags are not the same as their verbal meaning. No, not necessarily, which is why I asked what the OSM definition of "highway=road" is. And I'm not quite sure what your answer is. Are you saying it's a generic path where people travel, such that all highway=* ways (except for the dumb ones like highway=proposed) are "roads"? If so, I think that's fine, but the wiki fairly clearly contradicts that, referring to a subdivision between "roads" and "paths". And highway=unknown or even highway=highway would be less confusing. (And yes, "highway" itself is a dumb choice of mnemonic, but that one is far too ingrained to be fixed.) >> The wiki is confusing, though. It puts highway=residential, >> highway=track, highway=service, and highway=pedestrian under the >> subcategory of "roads", but it puts highway=cycleway, highway=footway, >> and highway=bridleway under the subcategory of "paths". Which I >> thought was distinguishing between motor vehicle traffic allowed and >> motor vehicle traffic not allowed. > > IMHO that's perfectly OK, (note that I don't confirm road= "highway=road") The wiki clearly says that highway=road is a tag for a road, though. And even besides that, it's not perfectly okay, because it's confusing as hell. The wiki presents highway=* broken down into two categories, roads and paths. It presents highway=road as a generic road, and highway=path as a generic path, and then other various highway=* values as being more specific roads or paths. Which would make perfect sense, except for the fact that a bunch of people are now saying that this isn't actually how we're supposed to be tagging things. >> But then highway=pedestrian would >> be an exception. > > It is a "pedestrianized road" = a road And a cycleway can be a road where bicycles are allowed but motor vehicles aren't. So why isn't cycleway under "roads" as well? I've asked this before, and I don't think you've answered it (though others have). What is a "road"? If it's just a paved path where people travel, then a cycleway is a road. If it is an "official" (i.e. marked as a separate parcel, or given a name for addressing purposes) path where people travel, then a track isn't a road. If you want to separate highway=* into "roads" and "paths", then what is the distinction? If not, then the subcategories shouldn't be in the wiki. >> Well, according to my understanding of the wiki, a cycleway (like a >> bridleway and a footway) is a "path" and not a "road". If we want to >> keep that distinction, maybe there should be a highway=unknown tag, >> for cases where we don't know if it's a "path" or a "road". > > I think that is not necessary. I am in favor of changing what the wiki > states about "highway=road" Me too, although I can't really figure out what it is supposed to say. I suspect "a path where motor vehicles travel" is the about closest to the de facto definition, as I suspect that most roads where motor vehicles are allowed to travel are not tagged with motor_vehicle=yes/permissive (and, in fact, I have in the past tagged roads with highway=road and thought that motor_vehicle=yes/permissive was implied). _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
