[Tagging] RFC: highway=tidal_road

Stephen Hope slhope at gmail.com
Fri Nov 25 01:17:04 GMT 2011

I can see both sides of the argument. We don't want too much
proliferation of special road types - we already have ice roads, now
tidal is suggested, there could easily be dry weather only (or
not-monsoon only), 4wd only, summer only, etc.  How far do we want to
take this?

On the other hand, we don't want dumb renderers treating these as
ordinary roads by mistake.  They can of course do it on purpose, if
they wish.

If we do want to separate them out, my suggestion is to use a single
road type tag to indicate one of these special roads -
highway=special_road (and maybe highway=special_path). Then extra
tagging to differentiate them (special_type=ice_road/tidal/etc). This
way we separate them out from the normal roads, if we think that's
important, but don't create too many extra main tags. And a renderer
can treat these as a group for special display, without having to know
about the specific road types.


On 25 November 2011 09:01, Gary Gallagher <g.null.device at gmail.com> wrote:
> From a hikers point of view I'd like to see some differentiation of tide
> affected ways. There's a number of tracks I didn't put on the map because I
> wasn't sure the tidal info placed in side tags would get to rendered. Use of
> difficulty scales doesn't quite warn someone either. I know given the
> current state of the map it can't be relied on for hiking. But one would
> hope it was heading in that direction. Though I dislike 4 wheel drivers
> stuffing up the landscape - it exists and it's requirements should be mapped
> where it is allowed.
> Gary
> P.S.
> As an australian english speaker 'tidal' works well for me

More information about the Tagging mailing list