<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 24/09/2014 1:27 AM,
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:tagging-request@openstreetmap.org">tagging-request@openstreetmap.org</a> wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:mailman.4190.1411486039.3429.tagging@openstreetmap.org"
type="cite">
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2014 15:43:07 +0200
From: Martin Koppenhoefer <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:dieterdreist@gmail.com"><dieterdreist@gmail.com></a>
To: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools"
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:tagging@openstreetmap.org"><tagging@openstreetmap.org></a>
Subject: Re: [Tagging] New key proposal - paved=yes/no
Message-ID:
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:CABPTjTD7KBdbxZs9p8kz-AnRnB-D9g91d3hK1TfmsNK+dmhKnA@mail.gmail.com"><CABPTjTD7KBdbxZs9p8kz-AnRnB-D9g91d3hK1TfmsNK+dmhKnA@mail.gmail.com></a>
Content-Type:
text/plain; charset="utf-8"
2014-09-23 1:12 GMT+02:00 David Bannon
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:dbannon@internode.on.net"><dbannon@internode.on.net></a>:</blockquote>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:mailman.4190.1411486039.3429.tagging@openstreetmap.org"
type="cite">
here we are on the tagging mailing list, to discuss tagging of
objects in
the OSM database. With current tags it is indeed possible to say
whether a
road is paved or not according to your own definition. The fact
that a
particular rendering (carto osm) doesn't currently display the
paved
attribute of a road has nothing to do when the question is whether
current
tagging works or not. In fact, the maintainers of carto osm have
recently
been discussing how to display unpaved roads differently from
paved ones,
so this could come in the future. This is really not an argument
for the
introduction of a new tag.
cheers,
Martin
-------------- next part <br>
</blockquote>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:mailman.4190.1411486039.3429.tagging@openstreetmap.org"
type="cite">
Message: 3
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2014 07:54:43 -0700 (PDT)
From: Richard Fairhurst <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:richard@systemed.net"><richard@systemed.net></a>
To: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Tagging@openstreetmap.org">Tagging@openstreetmap.org</a>
Subject: Re: [Tagging] New key proposal - paved=yes/no
Message-ID: <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:1411484083204-5818261.post@n5.nabble.com"><1411484083204-5818261.post@n5.nabble.com></a>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
David Bannon wrote:
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">The truth is the paved/unpaved state of a road is being widely
ignored or incorrectly interpreted. The map at osm.org illustrates
my point, perhaps as well as an XKCD cartoon :-)
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
Yep, absolutely. But the way to fix that is to get the map at osm.org to
render surfaces, using the existing tags. (And I agree, that would be a
great enhancement.)
I was about to point you to
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/110">https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/110</a> but then I
noticed that you're all over it already. :)
cheers
Richard
</pre>
</blockquote>
<meta http-equiv="CONTENT-TYPE" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<p class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0cm" lang="en-AU"><br>
One
more point against that I have not seen (yet) .. with
this additional tag you can get conflicts
e.g.<br>
<br>
Paved=yes<br>
Surface=Unpaved<br>
<br>
Oh .. you want to
exclude paved/unpaved from surface? Ok, then we get
<br>
<br>
Paved=yes<br>
Surface=sand<br>
<br>
As per Peewee post - the
definition of 'paved' vs 'unpaved' is open to interpretation. But
I don't think anyone would accept 'sand' as being 'paved'? <br>
<br>
Some
might consider 'gravel' to be 'paved' .. most won't. It is an
improvement over say sand, but then any track is an improvement
over
virgin territory. Much better to get the detail of the surface. I
do
tag surface=unpaved where the surface is made up of multiple
things -
one length would be sand, another dirt .. and probably some bits
of
bulldust, gibber and salt lake. Where it is substantially on type
then I'll put that surface down. Then the renderer can decide what
is
'paved' ... anything else (including unknowns) should be
classified
as 'unpaved' ... this is the safe way as more people selecting
paved
may not be able to use unpaved .. where as those selecting unpaved
would be capable of using paved. (And as points out it is a
rendering/routing problem that should be addressed by them, not
the
taggers). <br>
<br>
Suggest the proposal is retracted, and other
courses taken to rectify this issue?<br>
</p>
<p class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0cm" lang="en-AU"><br>
</p>
<title></title>
<meta name="GENERATOR" content="OpenOffice 4.1.0 (Win32)">
<style type="text/css">
<!--
@page { margin: 2cm }
P { margin-bottom: 0.21cm }
-->
</style><br>
<br>
</body>
</html>