[Tagging] [OSM-talk] Dirt Roads in Mapnik, default render in OSM

Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdreist at gmail.com
Mon Aug 26 13:58:02 UTC 2013

2013/8/26 Lester Caine <lester at lsces.co.uk>

> This was part of the discussion on tracks and paths at the time.

AFAIK that distinction was always made by width (or width for the
access-points, e.g. if they are blocked by boulders you won't be able to go
there by car anyway)

> My own reason for wanting to distinguish what I will call 'unclassified'
> which do not have a tidy surface or are 'residential' or 'service' which
> require care is that there should be a clear demarcation between roads that
> are generally safe to pass and those which may not be appropriate in some
> circumstances.

many roads in Europe might not be safe to pass in the winter time (or some
might not be safe to pass in the summer time, see "winter road" discussion
from the Russians). This doesn't make them less "public roads"

> Personally I was caught out with an older satnav showing no change when
> going from a main A road to what was essentially a 'dirt track' ( at that
> time not even a colour change ) ... it was still a perfectly legal road and
> there were warnings about single track with passing places, but I might
> have preferred to re-route if I was towing and I was already committed by
> the time the signage appeared. I think the real point is passing on the
> information that while a road may be part of the normal transport network,
> some may be less than suitable in some circumstances!

yes, but there are other tags to use than the highway class that can
express in greater detail what might be the problem (e.g. surface, width,
smoothness, lanes, ...)

> Simply tagging 'unclassified' and merging with roads which are simply
> unmaintained by the local council while valid does not easily pass on
> important information while personally I feel these are 'tracks' and need
> to be tagged as such!

what about adding unmaintained=yes?

> It is different rendering that is the point here

yes and no. Yes, the rendering should preferably distinguish between paved
and unpaved roads, and no, the highway class should not be chosen by the
rendering rules of a certain style.

 ( And this discussion should probably be on the tagging list, but I've
still not added that to my catalogue )

+1, crossposted to tagging, please lets continue there

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20130826/a98b6257/attachment.html>

More information about the Tagging mailing list