[OSM-newbies] tertiary dirt roads?

[James Ewen]

On Sat, Nov 14, 2009 at 11:02 AM, Charlotte Wolter
<techlady at techlady.com> wrote:

>         I need guidance on tagging where dirt roads are major ways.

What do you class as "dirt"? I would consider a "dirt road" to be one
where the roadway consists of only naturally occurring materials. I
know some people consider any road with a loose surface to be "dirt".


> In western parts of the United States, especially the Southwest, a dirt road
> may be a major link, reaching deep into a rural area. These usually are very
> good dirt roads, wide and graded regularly. Because of their good quality,
> they provide access for the average passenger car, which often can travel
> these roads at a fairly high rate of speed, say 35 or 45 miles an hour.
>         If these ways are tagged as "track," they are rendered on the map as
> an ordinary brown line. At lower resolutions, the brown line becomes
> rendered as a dashed brown line, and the character of these roads is lost
> completely.  They are mapped like any other dirt track.
>         So I have been tagging them as tertiary roads and have added
> "tracktype=grade1."  Is this a problem? Is there an alternative?

We have a similar situation happening here... I have tracked gravel
roads back in the bush used for forestry as well as oil and gas well
access. Many of these roads are built and maintained by private
companies, but public vehicles are allowed access. These roads can be
50 feet wide, with excellent roadbase, intended for trucks hauling
35,000 kg loads. Speed limits are usually 80 km/h.

The closest description in the map features would be for a track:
***
Roads for agricultural use, gravel roads in the forest etc.; usually
unpaved/unsealed but may occasionally apply to paved tracks as well,
see tracktype=* for more guidance.
***

The GeoBase import script however imports these same roads as tertiary:
***
A "C" road in the UK. Generally for use on roads wider than 4 metres
(13') in width, and for faster/wider minor roads that aren't A or B
roads. In the UK, they tend to have dashed lines down the middle,
whereas unclassified roads don't.
***

I tag the local rural road grid as tertiary... we have primary
highways (usually numbered between 1 and 99), and lower grade
secondary highways (numbered between 600 and 699 for east/west
roadways, and 800 and 899 for north/south roadways). Below that, I tag
the local road grid as tertiary, and then below that, the roads in
subdivisions as residential.

I prefer the main roads in the bush being tagged as tertiary, because
they then become a useful addition to the map database.

Larger roads that connect places should be renderer at scales where
you have a chance of seeing where the roadways connect. Minor roads
off of these can clutter the map if rendered when too early. I have
this type of issue with my GPS navigator. If I zoom out far enough to
see where I am headed, I usually have a blank screen in front of me,
and therefore of not much use in planning my route. If I zoom in close
enough to see the roads, I can not see my destination, which means I
can not determine which road will take me to that destination, again
not much use for planning my route.

James
VE6SRV