<div dir="ltr">in this particular case, the paving stops after ca 200m and the road is unpaved after that. I did not see any local traffic and I assume the road is only used by farmers. <br>Of course, the road is also used by pedestrians, as there is a walking route. I believe there was also an MTB-route, but I hope no one will retag it for those reasons to footway or cycleway.<div><br></div><div>As far as my observation goes for this particular road, "<tt dir="ltr" class="gmail-mw-content-ltr" style="font-size:1em;font-family:monospace,monospace;direction:ltr;color:rgb(32,33,34);background:rgb(238,238,255);line-height:1.6"><a href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:highway" title="Key:highway" style="color:rgb(11,0,128);background:none">highway</a>=<a class="gmail-mw-selflink gmail-selflink" style="text-decoration:inherit;color:inherit;background:none;font-weight:bold">unclassified</a></tt><span style="color:rgb(32,33,34);font-family:sans-serif;font-size:14px"> should be used for roads used for local traffic, and for roads used to connect other towns," is not fulfilled. </span></div><div><span style="color:rgb(32,33,34);font-family:sans-serif;font-size:14px"><br></span></div><div><span style="color:rgb(32,33,34);font-family:sans-serif;font-size:14px">please note that the original definition of "unclassified" is based on the British road classification where "unclassified" is a road class.</span></div><div><span style="color:rgb(32,33,34);font-family:sans-serif;font-size:14px"><br></span></div><div><span style="color:rgb(32,33,34);font-family:sans-serif;font-size:14px">regards</span></div><div><span style="color:rgb(32,33,34);font-family:sans-serif;font-size:14px"><br></span></div><div><span style="color:rgb(32,33,34);font-family:sans-serif;font-size:14px">m.</span></div><div><span style="color:rgb(32,33,34);font-family:sans-serif;font-size:14px"><br></span></div><div><span style="color:rgb(32,33,34);font-family:sans-serif;font-size:14px">p.s. 2 lanes of concrete is typically an indication that it is a track and not an unclassified road.</span></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Mon, Jan 4, 2021 at 8:02 PM EeBie <<a href="mailto:ebe050@gmail.com">ebe050@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
  

    
  
  <div>
    Just to remind. The
    international convention is: <u>tracks</u> are roads for mostly
    <i>agricultural or forestry uses</i>. <br>
    <div>
      <p style="margin-bottom:0cm;line-height:100%">
        T<span lang="en-US">his is not
          in contrast to the practice in Belgium where most paved roads
          in the
          fields are tagged as </span><span lang="en-US"><u>unclassified</u></span><span lang="en-US">. <br>
          Those roads are not only used by agricultural vehicles, </span><span lang="en-US">t</span><span lang="en-US">hey
          do not end in a field or meadow, <br>
          but they are through roads between
          villages </span><span lang="en-US">often </span><span lang="en-US">more
        </span><span lang="en-US">used by </span><span lang="en-US">cyclists
          than </span><span lang="en-US">by</span><span lang="en-US">
          tractors.
        </span>
      </p>
      <p style="margin-bottom:0cm;line-height:100%"><span lang="en-US">There
          are almost no paved roads with access restricted to
          agricultural
          vehicles. <br>
          When there is no traffic sign to restrict access to these
          paved road, tagging as track is wrong.<br>
          If there is a road sign, it is usually F99C </span><span lang="en-US">meaning
          that those roads are not specially meant for </span><span lang="en-US">agriculture
          vehicles </span><span lang="en-US"><br>
          but also designed for </span><span lang="en-US">bicycles,
          pedestrians </span><span lang="en-US">and </span><span lang="en-US">horses.
        </span><span lang="en-US">So classifying as </span><span lang="en-US"><i>unclassified</i></span><span lang="en-US">
          is best.</span></p>
      <p style="margin-bottom:0cm;line-height:100%"><span lang="en-US">Paved
          r</span><span lang="en-US">oads for </span><span lang="en-US">agricultural
        </span><span lang="en-US">use</span><span lang="en-US"> only can
          be
          tagged as track with tracktype grade1. <br>
          But </span><span lang="en-US">when</span><span lang="en-US">
          paved smaller roads can and are used </span><span lang="en-US">for
        </span><span lang="en-US">bicycle trips, I like to keep them as
          ‘unclassified’ and <br>
          I do my best to change those in this way. <br>
          In
          that way they look </span><span lang="en-US">as quality
          roads on the map and not as tracks.</span></p>
      <p style="margin-bottom:0cm;line-height:100%"><span lang="en-US">Regards,</span></p>
      <p style="margin-bottom:0cm;line-height:100%"><span lang="en-US">E.<br>
        </span></p>
      <br>
      <br>
      -------- Doorgestuurd bericht --------
      <table cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" border="0">
        <tbody>
          <tr>
            <th valign="BASELINE" nowrap align="RIGHT">Onderwerp:
            </th>
            <td>Re: [OSM-talk-be] tagging conventions</td>
          </tr>
          <tr>
            <th valign="BASELINE" nowrap align="RIGHT">Datum: </th>
            <td>Sun, 3 Jan 2021 19:54:20 +0100</td>
          </tr>
          <tr>
            <th valign="BASELINE" nowrap align="RIGHT">Van: </th>
            <td>Marc Gemis <a href="mailto:marc.gemis@gmail.com" target="_blank"><marc.gemis@gmail.com></a></td>
          </tr>
          <tr>
            <th valign="BASELINE" nowrap align="RIGHT">Antwoord-naar:
            </th>
            <td>OpenStreetMap Belgium <a href="mailto:talk-be@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank"><talk-be@openstreetmap.org></a></td>
          </tr>
          <tr>
            <th valign="BASELINE" nowrap align="RIGHT">Aan: </th>
            <td>OpenStreetMap Belgium <a href="mailto:talk-be@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank"><talk-be@openstreetmap.org></a></td>
          </tr>
        </tbody>
      </table>
      <br>
      <br>
      <div dir="ltr">I agree that it makes no sense to require that a
        track is unpaved. Take e.g. this road: <a href="https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/6Rt57ujlrmgcfRttgbeFXm" target="_blank">https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/6Rt57ujlrmgcfRttgbeFXm</a>
        What else can it be than a track?
        <div><br>
        </div>
        <div>As for the difference between cycleway and path, that is
          more difficult. For me, a cycleway requires a D7 sign. Without
          this sign, it is a path. A Jaagpad is also no cycleway. See
          the wiki for the latest tagging of Jaagpaden.</div>
        <div><br>
        </div>
        <div>regards</div>
        <div><br>
        </div>
        <div>m.</div>
        <div><br>
        </div>
      </div>
      <br>
      <div class="gmail_quote">
        <div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Sun, Jan 3, 2021 at 5:16 PM
          Wouter Hamelinck <<a href="mailto:wouter.hamelinck@gmail.com" target="_blank">wouter.hamelinck@gmail.com</a>>
          wrote:<br>
        </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">It is a discussion that comes back once in a
            while and I agree that having a separate Belgian meaning for
            a very common tag as track makes no sense. I'm also
            following the international wiki in that regard.
            <div><br>
            </div>
            <div>wouter</div>
          </div>
          <br>
          <div class="gmail_quote">
            <div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Sat, Jan 2, 2021 at
              7:00 PM s8evq <<a href="mailto:s8evqq@runbox.com" target="_blank">s8evqq@runbox.com</a>>
              wrote:<br>
            </div>
            <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">I was not aware of
              these national conventions, and therefor also never
              adhered to it. I always used the wiki pages on the
              different highway types. I'm not sure why we would need to
              differ from the international standards. It's already hard
              enough as is :)<br>
              <br>
              On Sat, 02 Jan 2021 17:21:55 +0100, Jan Cnops <<a href="mailto:jan.cnops@scarlet.be" target="_blank">jan.cnops@scarlet.be</a>>
              wrote:<br>
              <br>
              > Hi,<br>
              > An Overpass Turbo query shows that there are quite
              some ways tagged as<br>
              > higway=track and tracktype=grade1, so definitely
              paved.<br>
              > In a somewhat wider perspective: I recently saw a
              road retagged to<br>
              > highway=service. In the past that road had been
              mapped at various times<br>
              > as highway=cycleway, highway=path and highway=track
              with<br>
              > tracktype=grade1.<br>
              > This kind of retagging happens rather often, and it
              shows there is a<br>
              > problem there: it is clear that it makes the map less
              useful than it<br>
              > could be. If mappers are confused about what a way
              should be tagged<br>
              > like, users will be confused what a certain tag means
              for the road.<br>
              > Isn't it time to clean up things?<br>
              > The problem seems to lie with those roads which are
              important for<br>
              > cyclists: smaller roads with limited or no motorised
              traffic.<br>
              > I have no idea what the proper procedure is to change
              the Wiki, as some<br>
              > form of consensus is obviously needed.  Does one
              start with an RFC on<br>
              > this mailing list, or something like that?<br>
              > Season greetings,<br>
              > JanFi<br>
              > Stijn Rombauts via Talk-be schreef op za 02-01-2021
              om 09:00 [+0000]:<br>
              > >                 <br>
              > > Hi,<br>
              > > <br>
              > > A reminder to everyone: as far as I can see this
              convention hasn't<br>
              > > changed...<br>
              > > <br>
              > > Regards,<br>
              > > <br>
              > > StijnRR<br>
              > > <br>
              > >             <br>
              > >                                                 
                                  <br>
              > >                    On Tuesday, December 22,
              2015, 05:59:16 PM GMT+1,<br>
              > > Ben Laenen <<a href="mailto:benlaenen@gmail.com" target="_blank">benlaenen@gmail.com</a>><br>
              > > wrote:                                <br>
              > >                 <br>
              > >                 I'm sure you can look through
              this mailing list's<br>
              > > history and find all kinds of <br>
              > > discussion about it in the past...<br>
              > > <br>
              > > Long story short: the unpaved thing was more or
              less the original<br>
              > > usage, then <br>
              > > it was changed in some other countries which was
              set as the<br>
              > > international <br>
              > > definition and in Belgium we didn't change it.<br>
              > > <br>
              > > Personally I think the difference unpaved
              <-> paved for track <-><br>
              > > other road <br>
              > > types makes much more sense in Belgium, and also
              much more objective.<br>
              > > <br>
              > > Ben<br>
              > > <br>
              > > <br>
              > > On Tuesday 22 December 2015 08:37:35 joost
              schouppe wrote:<br>
              > > > Hi all,<br>
              > > > <br>
              > > > I was looking at this page:<br>
              > > > <a href="http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Belgium/Conventions/" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Belgium/Conventions/</a><br>
              > > Highways<br>
              > > > <br>
              > > > And I saw only unpaved roads are supposed
              to be tagged as track.<br>
              > > I've been<br>
              > > > seeing quite a few rural roads which only
              allow agricultural<br>
              > > vehicles and<br>
              > > > only lead to fields. They look to me
              essentially as paved tracks.<br>
              > > In most<br>
              > > > of the world (i.e. outside of Europe) what
              the road is used for<br>
              > > trumps road<br>
              > > > quality when it comes to classification.<br>
              > > > <br>
              > > > Shouldn't this "Unpaved roads with traces
              of motor traffic or<br>
              > > accessible to<br>
              > > > motor traffic" be replaced by something
              like "Paths which show use<br>
              > > of<br>
              > > > occasional motor traffic, or are designed
              to do so and that don't<br>
              > > prohibit<br>
              > > > such use. Generally unpaved and used to
              access forests or<br>
              > > agricultural<br>
              > > > fields."<br>
              > > <br>
              > > <br>
              > > _______________________________________________<br>
              > > Talk-be mailing list<br>
              > > <a href="mailto:Talk-be@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank">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>
              > > _______________________________________________<br>
              > > Talk-be mailing list<br>
              > > <a href="mailto:Talk-be@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank">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>
              > Talk-be mailing list<br>
              > <a href="mailto:Talk-be@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank">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>
              <br>
              <br>
              _______________________________________________<br>
              Talk-be mailing list<br>
              <a href="mailto:Talk-be@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank">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>
            </blockquote>
          </div>
          <br clear="all">
          <div><br>
          </div>
          -- <br>
          <div dir="ltr">"Den som ikke tror på seg selv kommer ingen
            vei."<br>
                                                   - Thor Heyerdahl</div>
          _______________________________________________<br>
          Talk-be mailing list<br>
          <a href="mailto:Talk-be@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank">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>
        </blockquote>
      </div>
    </div>
  </div>

_______________________________________________<br>
Talk-be mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Talk-be@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank">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>
</blockquote></div>