<div dir="ltr"><div><div><div>I totally agree with you, Joost.<br></div>The international wiki [1] is very clear: "Roads for mostly <i>agricultural or forestry uses</i>. To describe the quality of a track, see <tt style="background:rgb(221,221,238) none repeat scroll 0% 0%;white-space:nowrap" dir="ltr"><a href="http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:tracktype" title="Key:tracktype">tracktype</a>=*</tt>. Note: Although <tt>track</tt>s
are often rough with unpaved surfaces, this tag is not describing the
quality of a road but its use. Consequently, if you want to tag a
general use road, use one of the <a href="http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Map_Features#Roads">general <tt>highway</tt> values</a> instead of <tt>track</tt>.
"<br></div>The Belgian wiki is stating it the other way around for (in my opinion) no reason whatsoever. Tracks should be only tagged at the countryside or in forests. Each time I see something tagged as a track in a city it makes me cringe. Absolutely in favor of aligning the Belgian wiki with the international standard.<br></div>For me a simple copy-paste of the international wiki would be the best solution. I don't see why that definition needs to be adapted for Belgium. Why invent something that is slightly different?<br><div><div><br>[1]: <a href="http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Map_Features#Special_road_types">http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Map_Features#Special_road_types</a><br></div></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Dec 22, 2015 at 8:37 AM, joost schouppe <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:joost.schouppe@gmail.com" target="_blank">joost.schouppe@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr">Hi all,<div><br></div><div>I was looking at this page: <a href="http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Belgium/Conventions/Highways" target="_blank">http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Belgium/Conventions/Highways</a></div><div><br></div><div>And I saw only unpaved roads are supposed to be tagged as track. I've been seeing quite a few rural roads which only allow agricultural vehicles and only lead to fields. They look to me essentially as paved tracks. In most of the world (i.e. outside of Europe) what the road is used for trumps road quality when it comes to classification.</div><div><br></div><div>Shouldn't this "Unpaved roads with traces of motor traffic or accessible to motor traffic" be replaced by something like "Paths which show use of occasional motor traffic, or are designed to do so and that don't prohibit such use. Generally unpaved and used to access forests or agricultural fields."<span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr">Joost @</div><div dir="ltr"><a href="http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/joost%20schouppe/" target="_blank">Openstreetmap</a> | <a href="https://twitter.com/joostjakob" target="_blank">Twitter</a> | <a href="https://www.linkedin.com/pub/joost-schouppe/48/939/603" target="_blank">LinkedIn</a> | <a href="http://www.meetup.com/OpenStreetMap-Belgium/members/97979802/" target="_blank">Meetup</a> | <a href="https://www.reddit.com/u/joostjakob" target="_blank">Reddit</a> | <a href="https://joostschouppe.wordpress.com/" target="_blank">Wordpress</a></div></div></div></div>
</font></span></div></div>
<br>_______________________________________________<br>
Talk-be mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Talk-be@openstreetmap.org">Talk-be@openstreetmap.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br><div class="gmail_signature">"Den som ikke tror på seg selv kommer ingen vei."<br> - Thor Heyerdahl</div>
</div>