<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
> Any OSM old-timers recall enough to comment?<br>
<br>
As the oldest-timer in Aus mapping (2005), I'll take that one.<br>
<br>
TL;DR: Looks like a non-native English speaker individual created a
continuum of of sand - fine_gravel - gravel in 2008 when sand -
gravel - rough_gravel or just sand - gravel would have fitted the
vernacular better. Never discussed or challenged. Probably because
the Brits and perhaps other Europeans with a mostly sealed public
road network use the word "gravel" too broadly to be useful
elsewhere.<br>
<br>
The broad answer is that we just didn't define terms in the early
days ... and were very UK-centric, i.e. assumed a term was
self-evident and true everywhere. The next wave was the nascent map
features page <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Map_features">https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Map_features</a> and
then individual pages - where terms suddenly got definitions but by
individuals such as myself with thought but not discussion. Often
that worked but it just needs one person with some local bias to
push it off. And again they tended to be dense population
Euro-centric.<br>
<br>
surface= values suddenly went from the undefined to very detailed in
August 2008 thanks to the work of German (so presumably non-native
English speaking) mapper Joerg:<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Key:surface&oldid=138642">https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Key:surface&oldid=138642</a><br>
<br>
Reviewing it now (finally!), I think he did an excellent job
overall. There is a continuum of sand -<b> fine_</b><b>gravel</b> -
<b>gravel</b> which kinda fits the different subjective experience
of walking, riding, biking, driving. And "compacted" has its own
definition.<br>
<br>
In hindsight, I see two issues:<br>
<br>
1) sand - <b>gravel - </b><b>rough_</b><b>gravel</b> would better
have fitted the vernacular or perhaps sand -<b> gravel - </b><b>aggregate</b>
(though an engineer or scientist might argue with aggregate). As a
trained geologist, rock chips between about 0.4 cm and 6 cm largest
dimension are formally "gravel" but if you want to subdivide, hey,
why not.<br>
<br>
2) I blame my fellow Brits (in and outside OSM)! Virtually all
public roads there are now sealed so they don't have the experience
and just call anything unsealed with a few or many rock chips of any
size "gravel". This is a recurring problem when defining semantic
ontologies. A word can have both a very broad meaning (sensu latu)
and a very tight, precise meaning (sensu stricto). And meaning can
also be different according to discipline, a road engineer may have
a different understanding to me as a geologist.<br>
<br>
In summary, (1) is too late to fix, so we should live with it. That
probably means that many true gravel roads should be reclassified to
surface=fine_gravel. And then my personal bugbear (2), a huge number
of gravel roads just aren't and should be classified "compacted" -
would very much appreciate other thoughts, it is how I map but I've
never had a chance to converse about it.<br>
<br>
> Is there actually anywhere in the world where roads are
commonly done this way?<br>
Never seen it in common usage. In Sweden, and so perhaps other
countries with winter ice, I do sometimes railway ballast size
gravel used for logging roads for heavy, and I mean heavy, machinery
and trucks.<br>
<br>
Mike<br>
<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 2021-02-23 11:59, Josh Marshall
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:4176D6CA-CB65-41BE-AC30-E60F99178B2D@gmail.com">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
This raises the question: how did the surface=gravel tag end up
getting defined as large aggregate/railway ballast anyway, given
it appears at odds with almost everyone’s usage of it, including
other significant online references such as: <a
href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravel_road" class=""
moz-do-not-send="true">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravel_road</a>
(which matches the vernacular perfectly)?? Any OSM old-timers
recall enough to comment? Is there actually anywhere in the world
where roads are commonly done this way?
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">With regard to:</div>
<div class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div dir="auto" class="">
<div dir="ltr" class="">Hi Josh and co, I ride a “gravel
bike” on dirt roads that are signposted as “gravel
road”but definitely don’t fit the OSM definition of gravel
= railway ballast. </div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div class="">and Michael’s</div>
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">I don't map much in the US but do in Australia
and Sweden. In both countries, I have rarely come across
what I consider to be gravel roads, instead consider most
unpaved roads and tracks to be 'dirt' or 'compacted':</div>
</blockquote>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
Same here. I might provide a single counter-example; the major
through road in the Watagans near me was actually lined with
this large ballast last time I rode through; an absolute
nightmare to ride on, and I can’t imagine it’s too kind on
vehicles either. Presumably an initial step before further
surfacing? Has anyone else seen this surface?
<div class="">
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
<div><br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">On 23 Feb 2021, at 8:44 pm, Little Maps
<<a href="mailto:mapslittle@gmail.com" class=""
moz-do-not-send="true">mapslittle@gmail.com</a>>
wrote:</div>
<br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
<div class="">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html;
charset=UTF-8" class="">
<div dir="auto" class="">
<div dir="ltr" class="">Hi Josh and co, I ride a
“gravel bike” on dirt roads that are signposted as
“gravel road”but definitely don’t fit the OSM
definition of gravel = railway ballast. Because of
the common usage of gravel as a variably textured
dirt road in Australia, we face a massive uphill
battle to get accurate, specific unpaved road
surfaces in OSM. Here’s some data from Overpass
Turbo queries of all unpaved highway surfaces in
Victoria. This includes all highway tags (inc
roads and paths) not just tracks:</div>
<div dir="ltr" class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div dir="ltr" class="">
<table style="border-collapse: collapse; width:
251pt;" class="" width="335">
<colgroup class=""><col style="width: 121pt;"
class="" width="161"><col style="width:
64pt;" class="" width="85"><col
style="width: 67pt;" class="" width="89"></colgroup><tbody
class="">
<tr style="height: 18.75pt;" class=""
height="25">
<td class="xl19" style="padding-top: 1px;
padding-right: 1px; padding-left: 1px;
font-size: 14pt; font-family: Calibri,
sans-serif; vertical-align: bottom;
border: none; white-space: nowrap; width:
121pt; height: 18.75pt;" width="161"
height="25">Surface </td>
<td class="xl19" style="padding-top: 1px;
padding-right: 1px; padding-left: 1px;
font-size: 14pt; font-family: Calibri,
sans-serif; vertical-align: bottom;
border: none; white-space: nowrap; width:
64pt;" width="85"> Number</td>
<td class="xl19" style="padding-top: 1px;
padding-right: 1px; padding-left: 1px;
font-size: 14pt; font-family: Calibri,
sans-serif; vertical-align: bottom;
border: none; white-space: nowrap; width:
67pt;" width="89"> Percent</td>
</tr>
<tr style="height: 18.75pt;" class=""
height="25">
<td class="xl16" dir="LTR"
style="padding-top: 1px; padding-right:
1px; padding-left: 1px; font-size: 14pt;
vertical-align: bottom; border: none;
width: 121pt; height: 18.75pt;"
width="161" height="25">unpaved</td>
<td class="xl19" style="padding-top: 1px;
padding-right: 1px; padding-left: 1px;
font-size: 14pt; font-family: Calibri,
sans-serif; vertical-align: bottom;
border: none; white-space: nowrap;"
align="right">48664</td>
<td class="xl19" style="padding-top: 1px;
padding-right: 1px; padding-left: 1px;
font-size: 14pt; font-family: Calibri,
sans-serif; vertical-align: bottom;
border: none; white-space: nowrap;"
align="right">80</td>
</tr>
<tr style="height: 18.75pt;" class=""
height="25">
<td class="xl16" dir="LTR"
style="padding-top: 1px; padding-right:
1px; padding-left: 1px; font-size: 14pt;
vertical-align: bottom; border: none;
width: 121pt; height: 18.75pt;"
width="161" height="25">gravel</td>
<td class="xl19" style="padding-top: 1px;
padding-right: 1px; padding-left: 1px;
font-size: 14pt; font-family: Calibri,
sans-serif; vertical-align: bottom;
border: none; white-space: nowrap;"
align="right">6159</td>
<td class="xl19" style="padding-top: 1px;
padding-right: 1px; padding-left: 1px;
font-size: 14pt; font-family: Calibri,
sans-serif; vertical-align: bottom;
border: none; white-space: nowrap;"
align="right">10</td>
</tr>
<tr style="height: 18.75pt;" class=""
height="25">
<td class="xl16" dir="LTR"
style="padding-top: 1px; padding-right:
1px; padding-left: 1px; font-size: 14pt;
vertical-align: bottom; border: none;
width: 121pt; height: 18.75pt;"
width="161" height="25">dirt</td>
<td class="xl19" style="padding-top: 1px;
padding-right: 1px; padding-left: 1px;
font-size: 14pt; font-family: Calibri,
sans-serif; vertical-align: bottom;
border: none; white-space: nowrap;"
align="right">4559</td>
<td class="xl19" style="padding-top: 1px;
padding-right: 1px; padding-left: 1px;
font-size: 14pt; font-family: Calibri,
sans-serif; vertical-align: bottom;
border: none; white-space: nowrap;"
align="right">8</td>
</tr>
<tr style="height: 18.75pt;" class=""
height="25">
<td class="xl16" dir="LTR"
style="padding-top: 1px; padding-right:
1px; padding-left: 1px; font-size: 14pt;
vertical-align: bottom; border: none;
width: 121pt; height: 18.75pt;"
width="161" height="25">compacted</td>
<td class="xl19" style="padding-top: 1px;
padding-right: 1px; padding-left: 1px;
font-size: 14pt; font-family: Calibri,
sans-serif; vertical-align: bottom;
border: none; white-space: nowrap;"
align="right">642</td>
<td class="xl19" style="padding-top: 1px;
padding-right: 1px; padding-left: 1px;
font-size: 14pt; font-family: Calibri,
sans-serif; vertical-align: bottom;
border: none; white-space: nowrap;"
align="right">1.1</td>
</tr>
<tr style="height: 18.75pt;" class=""
height="25">
<td class="xl16" dir="LTR"
style="padding-top: 1px; padding-right:
1px; padding-left: 1px; font-size: 14pt;
vertical-align: bottom; border: none;
width: 121pt; height: 18.75pt;"
width="161" height="25">sand</td>
<td class="xl19" style="padding-top: 1px;
padding-right: 1px; padding-left: 1px;
font-size: 14pt; font-family: Calibri,
sans-serif; vertical-align: bottom;
border: none; white-space: nowrap;"
align="right">406</td>
<td class="xl19" style="padding-top: 1px;
padding-right: 1px; padding-left: 1px;
font-size: 14pt; font-family: Calibri,
sans-serif; vertical-align: bottom;
border: none; white-space: nowrap;"
align="right">1</td>
</tr>
<tr style="height: 18.75pt;" class=""
height="25">
<td class="xl16" dir="LTR"
style="padding-top: 1px; padding-right:
1px; padding-left: 1px; font-size: 14pt;
vertical-align: bottom; border: none;
width: 121pt; height: 18.75pt;"
width="161" height="25">fine_gravel</td>
<td class="xl19" style="padding-top: 1px;
padding-right: 1px; padding-left: 1px;
font-size: 14pt; font-family: Calibri,
sans-serif; vertical-align: bottom;
border: none; white-space: nowrap;"
align="right">230</td>
<td class="xl19" style="padding-top: 1px;
padding-right: 1px; padding-left: 1px;
font-size: 14pt; font-family: Calibri,
sans-serif; vertical-align: bottom;
border: none; white-space: nowrap;"
align="right">0.4</td>
</tr>
<tr style="height: 18.75pt;" class=""
height="25">
<td class="xl16" dir="LTR"
style="padding-top: 1px; padding-right:
1px; padding-left: 1px; font-size: 14pt;
vertical-align: bottom; border: none;
width: 121pt; height: 18.75pt;"
width="161" height="25">earth</td>
<td class="xl19" style="padding-top: 1px;
padding-right: 1px; padding-left: 1px;
font-size: 14pt; font-family: Calibri,
sans-serif; vertical-align: bottom;
border: none; white-space: nowrap;"
align="right">46</td>
<td class="xl19" style="padding-top: 1px;
padding-right: 1px; padding-left: 1px;
font-size: 14pt; font-family: Calibri,
sans-serif; vertical-align: bottom;
border: none; white-space: nowrap;"
align="right">0</td>
</tr>
<tr style="height: 18.75pt;" class=""
height="25">
<td class="xl16" dir="LTR"
style="padding-top: 1px; padding-right:
1px; padding-left: 1px; font-size: 14pt;
vertical-align: bottom; border: none;
width: 121pt; height: 18.75pt;"
width="161" height="25">Total</td>
<td class="xl19" style="padding-top: 1px;
padding-right: 1px; padding-left: 1px;
font-size: 14pt; font-family: Calibri,
sans-serif; vertical-align: bottom;
border: none; white-space: nowrap;"
align="right">60706</td>
<td class="xl19" style="padding-top: 1px;
padding-right: 1px; padding-left: 1px;
font-size: 14pt; font-family: Calibri,
sans-serif; vertical-align: bottom;
border: none; white-space: nowrap;"
align="right">100<br class="">
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</div>
<div dir="ltr" class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div dir="ltr" class="">In case that’s illegible, if
you add all of these unpaved/dirt/gravel ways, 80%
are tagged with a generic unpaved tag (which is
entirely accurate if not especially precise).
Gravel is the next most common category,
accounting for 10% of ways. Apart from dirt at 8%,
the rest are used very rarely. </div>
<div dir="ltr" class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div dir="ltr" class="">My guess from tagging
surfaces on a lot of unpaved roads is that perhaps
80% of the roads tagged as gravel do not satisfy
the OSM wiki definition and should be tagged as
something else. Interestingly, the two most
relevant tags for formed, unpaved surfaces -
compacted and fine_gravel - are very rarely used
(around 1% each). There are probably more ways
that have fence-sitting tags like “dirt; sand;
gravel” that end up being pretty meaningless. </div>
<div dir="ltr" class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div dir="ltr" class="">Adding precise surface tags
may be simple on roads that are freshly maintained
but on roads that haven’t been maintained for a
while they’re often pretty difficult to assess
anyway. </div>
<div dir="ltr" class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div dir="ltr" class="">Personally, I feel that
there’s often too much emphasis in OSM on
precision (i.e. use detailed sub-tags) at the
expense of accuracy. I believe most of the generic
unpaved tags are accurate. I wish I could, but
unfortunately I don’t believe many of the specific
sub-tags are especially useful. (Sand is a goody
though!). Cheers Ian</div>
<div dir="ltr" class=""><br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">On 23 Feb 2021,
at 5:22 pm, Josh Marshall <<a
href="mailto:josh.p.marshall@gmail.com"
class="" moz-do-not-send="true">josh.p.marshall@gmail.com</a>>
wrote:<br class="">
<br class="">
</blockquote>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div dir="ltr" class="">
<div dir="ltr" class="">
<div dir="ltr" class="">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote"
style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">The
approved OSM tag for <a
href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:surface"
target="_blank" class=""
moz-do-not-send="true">surface=gravel</a> refers
to railway ballast, not the fine crushed
rock or natural surface that usually
occurs on unpaved roads in Australia.
However we call the fine unpaved surface
"gravel" in common parlance, and many
unpaved roads that don't constitute gravel
as described in the OSM wiki have been
tagged as gravel here, erroneously
depending on your point of view.<br
class="">
</blockquote>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">This is a matter of interest
to me too. I spend a substantial amount of
time running+riding on fire trails in NSW
(all highway=track), and the surface type
is useful and indeed used in a number of
the route planners I use. I have changed a
few roads back to 'unpaved' from 'gravel'
due to the rule of following the
description in the surface= guidelines
rather than the name. </div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">My question then however, is
exactly what to tag the tracks beyond
"unpaved".</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">There are definitely sections
that are somewhat regularly graded and
appear to have extra aggregate/fine gravel
added. From the surface= wiki, these most
closely align with surface=compacted. But
fine_gravel is potentially an option too.
Many of these are 2wd accessible when it
is dry. (Typically smoothness=bad.)</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">There are also others, usually
less travelled, which are bare rock, clay,
dirt, sand, whatever was there. Is it best
just to leave these as surface=unpaved,
and add a smoothness=very_bad or horrible
tag? None of the surface= tags really seem
to apply.</div>
</div>
</div>
<br class="">
<br class="">
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Tue, 23
Feb 2021 at 16:45, Little Maps <<a
href="mailto:mapslittle@gmail.com"
class="" moz-do-not-send="true">mapslittle@gmail.com</a>>
wrote:<br class="">
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote"
style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="ltr" class=""> <span class=""></span>Hi
Brian and co, in Victoria and southern NSW
where I've edited a lot of roads,
highway=track is nearly totally confined
to dirt roads in forested areas, as
described in the Aus tagging guidelines,
viz: " highway=track Gravel fire trails,
forest drives, 4WD trails and similar
roads. Gravel roads connecting towns etc.
should be tagged as appropriate
(secondary, tertiary or unclassified),
along with the surface=unpaved or more
specific surface=* tag."<br class="">
<br class="">
<div class="">In your US-chat someone
wrote, "...in the USA, "most" roads that
"most" people encounter (around here, in
my experience, YMMV...) are
surface=paved. Gravel or dirt roads are
certainly found, but they are less and
less common." By contrast, in regional
Australia, most small roads are
unpaved/dirt/gravel. <br class="">
</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">In SE Australia, public
roads in agricultural areas that are
unpaved/dirt/gravel/etc are usually
tagged as highway=unclassified (or
tertiary etc), not highway=track. There
are some exceptions in some small
regions (for example in the Rutherglen
area in NE Victoria) where really poor,
rough 'double track' tracks on public
road easements have systematically been
tagged with highway=track rather than
highway=unclassified. See here for
example: <a
href="https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=13/-36.1424/146.3683"
target="_blank" class=""
moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=13/-36.1424/146.3683
</a>. However, this is not the norm in
SE Australia and across the border in
southern NSW, this type of road is
nearly always tagged as unclassified, as
it is elsewhere in Victoria. In SE
Australia, my experience is that tracks
are tagged in the more traditional way,
and not as has been done in the USA. <br
class="">
</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">If I could ask you a related
question, what do you US mappers call
"gravel"? The approved OSM tag for <a
href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:surface"
target="_blank" class=""
moz-do-not-send="true">surface=gravel</a>
refers to railway ballast, not the fine
crushed rock or natural surface that
usually occurs on unpaved roads in
Australia. However we call the fine
unpaved surface "gravel" in common
parlance, and many unpaved roads that
don't constitute gravel as described in
the OSM wiki have been tagged as gravel
here, erroneously depending on your
point of view. How do you use the
surface=gravel tag in the USA? Cheers
Ian</div>
</div>
<br class="">
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Tue,
Feb 23, 2021 at 2:49 PM Brian M.
Sperlongano <<a
href="mailto:zelonewolf@gmail.com"
target="_blank" class=""
moz-do-not-send="true">zelonewolf@gmail.com</a>>
wrote:<br class="">
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote"
style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="ltr" class="">Hello all,
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">Recently, there was a
discussion on the talk-us list
regarding how we use the tag
highway=track. That discussion
begins here:</div>
<div class="">
<div class=""><a
href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/2021-February/020878.html"
target="_blank" class=""
moz-do-not-send="true">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/2021-February/020878.html</a><br
class="">
<br class="">
During that discussion, someone
suggested that Australian mappers
may also be using the
highway=track tag in a similar way
to US mappers. Hence this message
:)</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">I've recently made
edits to the wiki page for
highway=track describing how the
tag is used in the USA:</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
<a
href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dtrack#Usage_in_the_United_States"
target="_blank" class=""
moz-do-not-send="true">https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dtrack#Usage_in_the_United_States</a><br
class="">
<br class="">
</div>
<div class="">If there is similarly
a local variation in how this tag
is used, I would encourage the
Australian community to document
their usage as well. </div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">Brian Sperlongano</div>
<div class="">Rhode Island, USA</div>
</div>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br class="">
Talk-au mailing list<br class="">
<a
href="mailto:Talk-au@openstreetmap.org"
target="_blank" class=""
moz-do-not-send="true">Talk-au@openstreetmap.org</a><br
class="">
<a
href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
class="" moz-do-not-send="true">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au</a><br
class="">
</blockquote>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br class="">
Talk-au mailing list<br class="">
<a href="mailto:Talk-au@openstreetmap.org"
target="_blank" class=""
moz-do-not-send="true">Talk-au@openstreetmap.org</a><br
class="">
<a
href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" class=""
moz-do-not-send="true">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au</a><br
class="">
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br class="">
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Talk-au@openstreetmap.org">Talk-au@openstreetmap.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>