<div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div>While I appreciate that you are attempting to document how this tag is actually used, there seems to be some too strong assertions in the new section:</div><div><br></div><div>1) highway=track is used for paved forestry roads in parts of the USA with heavy rainfall, e.g. Oregon:</div><div><a href="https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/141R">https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/141R</a> - for example <a href="https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/5520248">https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/5520248</a> and several nearby private forestry roads in the Bull Run watershed. There are also some logging roads in privately owned forestlands which are paved. There are 265 highway=track + tracktype=grade1 + surface=paved ways in California: <a href="https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/141S">https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/141S</a><br></div><div><br></div><div>2) Re: usage "<span style="color:rgb(32,33,34);font-family:sans-serif;font-size:14px">For any unmaintained, minimally maintained, or overgrown road, regardless of usage or purpose"</span></div><div><span style="color:rgb(32,33,34);font-family:sans-serif;font-size:14px">Can we actually cite examples of ways roads that meet that standard but which are not primarily tracks from a usage standpoint? </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">3) Re: "For abandoned roads"</span></div><div><span style="color:rgb(32,33,34);font-family:sans-serif;font-size:14px">- If by "abandoned" do you mean "disused" or "unusable"? This is somewhat confusing. I think it is generally considered incorrect to map unusable roads (even for off-road vehicles like ATVs or mountain bikes) as highway=track if they no longer exist, say if they are completely overgrown with scrub or completely washed out by erosion or landslides. While there are many non-existent roads currently in OpenStreetMap, that's because the Tiger data was often very old, or people have imported old forestry or agricultural tracks which no longer exist. </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">4) Re: "rural... away from population centers" - This is somewhat misleading. The tag highway=track is often used in semi-developed parks and natural areas located right next to cities. Searching overpass-turbo finds over 400 tracks in New York City, mostly in recreational lands, cemeteries or parks: </span><a href="https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/141T">https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/141T</a></div><div><br></div><div>-- Joseph Eisenberg</div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Mon, Feb 22, 2021 at 7:41 PM Brian M. Sperlongano <<a href="mailto:zelonewolf@gmail.com">zelonewolf@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr">Thanks everyone for the thoughtful replies. This was very helpful in shaping the community understanding of how we're using this tag in the US.<div><br></div><div>Based on this discussion, I've written up the following section on the wiki:</div><div><br></div><div><a href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dtrack#Usage_in_the_United_States" target="_blank">https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dtrack#Usage_in_the_United_States</a><br></div><div><br></div><div>Hopefully I've accurately captured our discussion here, even if it does make things a bit muddy from a global perspective. Feel free to revise this if you think I've gotten anything wrong!</div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Sun, Feb 21, 2021 at 12:53 PM Martijn van Exel <<a href="mailto:m@rtijn.org" target="_blank">m@rtijn.org</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div>
<p>Brian,<br>
</p>
<p>Thanks for collecting these insights. I wouldn't call its usage
controversial based on the mere fact that there is a range of
interpretations of its usage--that would render a good number of
tags in OSM controversial. <br>
</p>
<p>The bigger issue here is what is actually on the wiki. Right now,
discussions about US road tagging feed on a set of alternative
truths on there, which is not productive and makes for recurring
discussions on the same topics without a satisfying conclusion.<br>
</p>
A quite non-exhaustive list of pages with redundant / conflicting
information:
<ul>
<li><a href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_States/Road_classification" target="_blank">https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_States/Road_classification</a></li>
<li><a href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_States_Roadway_Classification_Guidelines" target="_blank">https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_States_Roadway_Classification_Guidelines</a></li>
<li><a href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_States_roads_tagging" target="_blank">https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_States_roads_tagging</a></li>
<li><a href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Highway:International_equivalence" target="_blank">https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Highway:International_equivalence</a></li>
<li>The international equivalent sections of the common road
classes, like
<a href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dtrunk#International_equivalence" target="_blank">https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dtrunk#International_equivalence</a><br>
</li>
<li>Various state page's sections on highway tagging, such as
<a href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/West_Virginia#Functional_Classification" target="_blank">https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/West_Virginia#Functional_Classification</a>,
<a href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/New_Jersey#Classifications" target="_blank">https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/New_Jersey#Classifications</a>,
<a href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Georgia_(U.S._state)#Highway_Classification" target="_blank">https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Georgia_(U.S._state)#Highway_Classification</a>,
<a href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Indiana#Highway_Classifications" target="_blank">https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Indiana#Highway_Classifications</a>,
<a href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Florida#Tagging_ideas_for_Florida" target="_blank">https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Florida#Tagging_ideas_for_Florida</a>
(there are likely many more)</li>
</ul>
<p>This is not saying you're wrong to raise it, not at all. I'm just
pointing out a root cause in the hopes that we can start working
on fixing the bigger issue. This is a big pile of work but with
big reward as well. <br>
</p>
<p>Martijn<br>
</p>
<div>On 2/19/2021 4:56 PM, Brian M.
Sperlongano wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>The usage of the tag highway=track is controversial. Through
discussion with both US-based and foreign mappers, it is apparent that
this tag is used differently in the US than it is in the rest of the
world. Further, the usage in the US appears to be different from how
it is documented on the OSM wiki[1].
The wiki description is "roads for mostly agricultural use, forest tracks etc."
In the US, the 2007 TIGER import assigned highway=track to CFCC code
A51, which is described as "Vehicular trail, road passable only by 4WD
vehicle, unseparated".
In a recent Slack discussion[2], mappers shared their perspective on
how they use highway=track:
"I always use track for public, unmaintained highways and usually use
track for discontinued roads. My thought is that if it used to be a
road, and snowmobiles and ATVs can still use it, then track works
(with access=permissive if applicable)" -aweech, New Hampshire
"I use highway=path for trails that were formerly cut as forestry
tracks (wide between trees), but are now only beaten in a single-track
due to exclusively non-motorized usage." -adamfranco, Vermont
"I use it for any rough, unmaintained looking track" -Zeke Farwell, Vermont
"I use track for any road that would be irresponsible to route over
because it might wreck a car, or isn’t cleared of snow, tree, or flood
debris, or only used during some seasons.. the “purpose” of the road
doesn’t matter to me." -bhousel, New Jersey
"I don't think forestry and agriculture are bad reasons for a road to
be a track, and that does indeed match the definition of a lot of
tracks in Colorado. If it were expanded to include the fact that this
use might be historical, and then add mining and other natural
resource management, and unmanaged recreation, then you'd cover almost
all of what we call tracks in the US" -phidauex, Colorado
It appears that the US usage of highway=track follows more closely to
the definition from the TIGER import, which is based on physical
characteristics, rather than the wiki definition, which is based on
usage.
US mappers: how do you apply highway=track in the US?
[1] <a href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway=track" target="_blank">https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway=track</a>
[2] <a href="https://osmus.slack.com/archives/C2VJAJCS0/p1613754200382000" target="_blank">https://osmus.slack.com/archives/C2VJAJCS0/p1613754200382000</a>
_______________________________________________
Talk-us mailing list
<a href="mailto:Talk-us@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank">Talk-us@openstreetmap.org</a>
<a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us" target="_blank">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote></div>
_______________________________________________<br>
Talk-us mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Talk-us@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank">Talk-us@openstreetmap.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us</a><br>
</blockquote></div>