The dirt roads discussion in Mapnik was more about first showing that a road is unpaved, be it a primary, secondary, residential, whatever the type from the *surface+unpaved *tag. I know from watching some documentries that the furthest north highway in the United Sates in Alaska, is dirt and gravel, but is considered a highway with 18 wheelers etc on it.
On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 9:58 AM, <talk-requ...@openstreetmap.org> wrote: > Send talk mailing list submissions to > talk@openstreetmap.org > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > talk-requ...@openstreetmap.org > > You can reach the person managing the list at > talk-ow...@openstreetmap.org > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of talk digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: Dirt Roads in Mapnik, default render in OSM > (Martin Koppenhoefer) > 2. Re: Dirt Roads in Mapnik, default render in OSM (Maarten Deen) > 3. Tracking user activity in an area (was: Making iD the default > editor on osm.org - some numbers) (SomeoneElse) > 4. Re: Dirt Roads in Mapnik, default render in OSM (Lester Caine) > 5. Re: Dirt Roads in Mapnik, default render in OSM > (Martin Koppenhoefer) > 6. Re: Dirt Roads in Mapnik, default render in OSM > (Martin Koppenhoefer) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2013 14:41:20 +0200 > From: Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdre...@gmail.com> > To: Pieren <pier...@gmail.com> > Cc: OpenStreetMap Talk Mailing List <talk@openstreetmap.org> > Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Dirt Roads in Mapnik, default render in OSM > Message-ID: > <CABPTjTDh9Nbcxh63=QcUBXtQ5mUHchOP_TO= > ppwe49x6ldb...@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > 2013/8/26 Pieren <pier...@gmail.com> > > > A highway=track + tracktype=grade1 can be > > safely used by normal cars. > > > > > technically yes, legally it depends > > > > > Perhaps in Germany, all tracks have limited access. > > > > > no, it depends on the area. In some regions it is true (AFAIK only in > Baden-W?rttemberg = BaW?) > > > > > But they all have > > traffic signs indicating the restriction(s). > > > > > no, apparently in BaW? there is a general restriction which doesn't have to > be signposted. > > But I think this direction of discussion misses the point. The point was > how to classify certain types of roads (unpaved connection and residential > roads). tracks are a type of road set up for agricultural (i.e. local > traffic of who works in the fields or forests or goes fishing) traffic. If > there are other reasons for a road to be (i.e. connection for "ordinary" > traffic, access to a plant or other technical installation) the highway > class should be chosen differently. A residential road can well be unpaved > in some parts of Germany as well, but that doesn't make it a track. In > remote zones in Italy there are provincial roads (i.e. roads of the network > maintained by the provinces) that aren't paved and are so narrow that 2 > cars only at some spots can pass, but that doesn't make them a track. > > cheers, > Martin > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: < > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20130826/9c2164bb/attachment-0001.html > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2013 14:54:13 +0200 > From: Maarten Deen <md...@xs4all.nl> > To: talk@openstreetmap.org > Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Dirt Roads in Mapnik, default render in OSM > Message-ID: <a2e827e7c9573495d5e6470801883...@xs4all.nl> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed > > On 2013-08-26 14:41, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > > tracks are a type of road set up for agricultural > > (i.e. local traffic of who works in the fields or forests or goes > > fishing) traffic. > > How do you know that without any signs next to the road? > > Maarten > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2013 14:14:11 +0100 > From: SomeoneElse <li...@mail.atownsend.org.uk> > To: Steve Bennett <stevag...@gmail.com> > Cc: Open Street Map mailing list <talk@openstreetmap.org> > Subject: [OSM-talk] Tracking user activity in an area (was: Making iD > the default editor on osm.org - some numbers) > Message-ID: <521b54a3.8090...@mail.atownsend.org.uk> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; Format="flowed" > > Steve Bennett wrote: > > Hi, > > Just wondering what tools you use to "keep an eye on" that area? I'd > > love to have a better idea of what other editors are doing in my area. > > For new users, it's similar to Martin, although via the map rather than > the RSS feed. > > For me it's essentially: > > http://resultmaps.neis-one.org/newestosm.php?zoom=9&lat=53.15754&lon=-1.58752&layers=0B0TFT > > but concentrating on areas that I'm familiar with, and ignoring areas > where other more local mappers keep an eye on things (e.g. the W Mids). > > I tend to follow this > <http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:SomeoneElse/new_mapper_messages> > when > sending messages to new mappers (essentially give people time to figure > out how to do stuff in OSM, try and be forgiving and try and be helpful). > > For actually seeing when "X has edited in Y" I use the usual tools such > as "WhoDidIt" and ITO World's "OSM Mapper" (see here > <http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Quality_assurance>), and also a bit > of java to help determine when large-scale edits actually affect me, > which I've stuck here: > > > https://github.com/SomeoneElseOSM/Changeset1/blob/master/src/Changeset1.java > > That also looks for way deletions and versions of ways (at some point in > the changeset - not necessarily at the end) without tags. > > A related process takes the list of new mappers who haven't quite got > the hang of things yet and appends something to the name of items in the > Garmin maps that I create for my own use, so that if I'm near somewhere > which has, for example, a footpath that doesn't quite join a road I can > check whether it actually does or not. > > Cheers, > > Andy > > > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: < > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20130826/2833b0c5/attachment-0001.html > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 4 > Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2013 14:34:59 +0100 > From: Lester Caine <les...@lsces.co.uk> > Cc: OpenStreetMap Talk Mailing List <talk@openstreetmap.org> > Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Dirt Roads in Mapnik, default render in OSM > Message-ID: <521b5983.7080...@lsces.co.uk> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > But I think this direction of discussion misses the point. The point was > how to > > classify certain types of roads (unpaved connection and residential > roads). > > tracks are a type of road set up for agricultural (i.e. local traffic of > who > > works in the fields or forests or goes fishing) traffic. If there are > other > > reasons for a road to be (i.e. connection for "ordinary" traffic, access > to a > > plant or other technical installation) the highway class should be chosen > > differently. A residential road can well be unpaved in some parts of > Germany as > > well, but that doesn't make it a track. In remote zones in Italy there > are > > provincial roads (i.e. roads of the network maintained by the provinces) > that > > aren't paved and are so narrow that 2 cars only at some spots can pass, > but that > > doesn't make them a track. > > This was part of the discussion on tracks and paths at the time. My own > reason > for wanting to distinguish what I will call 'unclassified' which do not > have a > tidy surface or are 'residential' or 'service' which require care is that > there > should be a clear demarcation between roads that are generally safe to > pass and > those which may not be appropriate in some circumstances. Personally I was > caught out with an older satnav showing no change when going from a main A > road > to what was essentially a 'dirt track' ( at that time not even a colour > change ) > ... it was still a perfectly legal road and there were warnings about > single > track with passing places, but I might have preferred to re-route if I was > towing and I was already committed by the time the signage appeared. I > think the > real point is passing on the information that while a road may be part of > the > normal transport network, some may be less than suitable in some > circumstances! > Simply tagging 'unclassified' and merging with roads which are simply > unmaintained by the local council while valid does not easily pass on > important > information while personally I feel these are 'tracks' and need to be > tagged as > such! It is different rendering that is the point here ... and iD is > making this > even more problematic by rendering everything with very similar styles > even for > footpaths! > > ( And this discussion should probably be on the tagging list, but I've > still not > added that to my catalogue ) > > -- > Lester Caine - G8HFL > ----------------------------- > Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact > L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk > EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ > Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk > Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 5 > Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2013 15:50:59 +0200 > From: Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdre...@gmail.com> > To: Maarten Deen <md...@xs4all.nl> > Cc: osm <talk@openstreetmap.org> > Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Dirt Roads in Mapnik, default render in OSM > Message-ID: > < > cabptjtaoc7p_hw4frb4kwesutgngbhqwszhoh4jyt6ro+cv...@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > 2013/8/26 Maarten Deen <md...@xs4all.nl> > > > On 2013-08-26 14:41, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > > > tracks are a type of road set up for agricultural > >> (i.e. local traffic of who works in the fields or forests or goes > >> fishing) traffic. > >> > > > > How do you know that without any signs next to the road? > > > > the relevant passage is ? 3 Abs. 2 Nr. 4 of "Stra?engesetz f?r > Baden-W?rttemberg" and various comments I found all point out that despite > "usually" there will be signs the restriction will also be valid in absence > of signs. My guess is you will have to know by "common sense". I agree that > this is not completely satisfactory. > > cheers, > Martin > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: < > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20130826/eb0508ba/attachment-0001.html > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 6 > Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2013 15:58:02 +0200 > From: Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdre...@gmail.com> > To: Lester Caine <les...@lsces.co.uk>, "Tag discussion, strategy and > related tools" <tagg...@openstreetmap.org> > Cc: OpenStreetMap Talk Mailing List <talk@openstreetmap.org> > Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Dirt Roads in Mapnik, default render in OSM > Message-ID: > < > cabptjtbplms+ajpyaubvfocjc5rr-kydi9r7rbg9ztbxjxx...@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > 2013/8/26 Lester Caine <les...@lsces.co.uk> > > > This was part of the discussion on tracks and paths at the time. > > > > > AFAIK that distinction was always made by width (or width for the > access-points, e.g. if they are blocked by boulders you won't be able to go > there by car anyway) > > > > > My own reason for wanting to distinguish what I will call 'unclassified' > > which do not have a tidy surface or are 'residential' or 'service' which > > require care is that there should be a clear demarcation between roads > that > > are generally safe to pass and those which may not be appropriate in some > > circumstances. > > > > > many roads in Europe might not be safe to pass in the winter time (or some > might not be safe to pass in the summer time, see "winter road" discussion > from the Russians). This doesn't make them less "public roads" > > > > > > Personally I was caught out with an older satnav showing no change when > > going from a main A road to what was essentially a 'dirt track' ( at that > > time not even a colour change ) ... it was still a perfectly legal road > and > > there were warnings about single track with passing places, but I might > > have preferred to re-route if I was towing and I was already committed by > > the time the signage appeared. I think the real point is passing on the > > information that while a road may be part of the normal transport > network, > > some may be less than suitable in some circumstances! > > > > > yes, but there are other tags to use than the highway class that can > express in greater detail what might be the problem (e.g. surface, width, > smoothness, lanes, ...) > > > > > Simply tagging 'unclassified' and merging with roads which are simply > > unmaintained by the local council while valid does not easily pass on > > important information while personally I feel these are 'tracks' and need > > to be tagged as such! > > > > > what about adding unmaintained=yes? > > > > > It is different rendering that is the point here > > > > > yes and no. Yes, the rendering should preferably distinguish between paved > and unpaved roads, and no, the highway class should not be chosen by the > rendering rules of a certain style. > > ( And this discussion should probably be on the tagging list, but I've > still not added that to my catalogue ) > > > +1, crossposted to tagging, please lets continue there > > cheers, > Martin > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: < > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20130826/a98b6257/attachment.html > > > > ------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > > > End of talk Digest, Vol 108, Issue 56 > ************************************* > -- "Have Bike will Travel" http://thebikeandmore.blogspot.com/
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
