[Tagging] Tags useful for rendering of roads in poor conditions

[Fernando Trebien]

So, let me know if you disagree with this summary. "Highway" here
excludes highway=track and highway=path.

A highway is "bad" (significantly worse for most people than its best
possible state) when it contains any of the following tags:

- tracktype=grade2/grade3/grade4/grade5
- smoothness=bad/very_bad/horrible/very_horrible/impassable
- surface=ground/dirt/earth/sand/grass

A highway is also "potentially bad" (perhaps under bad weather) if it
contains surface=unpaved/gravel/fine_gravel/pebblestone/compacted. *

A highway=residential/living_street/pedestrian/service/cycleway is
also "potentially bad" if it contains any of these other tags:

- mtb:scale=1/2/3/4/5/6
- sac_scale=T2/T3/T4/T5/T6
- wheelchair=no

No other tag or value is currently relevant for the assessment of how
"bad" a certain highway is.

Note: even if you agree, it doesn't mean that an application (such as
a renderer) has to support all of these conditions. For
openstreetmap-carto, it may suffice to add support for all conditions
up to the asterisk (*).

On Sat, Jan 4, 2014 at 12:17 AM, Fernando Trebien
<fernando.trebien at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hm there are a few types of vehicle ways
> (highway=residential/living_street/pedestrian/service/cycleway) which
> present high usage by non-vehicles, so I think it would also make
> sense if the renderer also checked for these values:
> - mtb:scale=0
> - sac_scale=T1
> - wheelchair=yes/limited
>
> Which, of course, could be checked for any other kind of way, but
> especially for these kinds this check seems important.
>
> On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 11:58 PM, Fernando Trebien
> <fernando.trebien at gmail.com> wrote:
>> I mean, maybe the renderer can follow this logic: all untagged ways
>> are paved ("good") by default, and they're represented as "bad" if
>> they include any of the following tags with different values than
>> those shown:
>> - tracktype=grade1
>> - smoothness=excellent/good/intermediate
>>
>> Thus, it would ignore the value of the surface tag. This would leave
>> our current tagging system unchanged.
>>
>> On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 11:42 PM, Fernando Trebien
>> <fernando.trebien at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> This is why I said that a full description that is useful to everyone
>>> would require many more tags than we currently have (about 6 or 7 as
>>> far as I can imagine). Note that the way in this picture would be
>>> classified quite differently for each vehicle type (pedestrians, and
>>> maybe bikes to some extent can do just fine on it, but not
>>> wheelchair).
>>>
>>> I would tag this one as this:
>>>
>>> surface=asphalt
>>> tracktype=grade1 (grade2 says unpaved-only and says nothing about potholes)
>>> smoothness=very_bad
>>> mtb:scale=1
>>> sac_scale=T1 (or maybe T2)
>>> wheelchair=limited
>>>
>>> But I think different people would disagree on whether we should
>>> render that as a 'good' or a 'bad' road. The potholes would likely be
>>> temporary in many countries, but not so much in others.
>>>
>>> So maybe the renderer should consider all tags except surface and draw
>>> the way as 'bad' if it is ever bad for someone (car, pedestrian,
>>> cyclist or wheelchair user).
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 11:26 PM, Dave Swarthout <daveswarthout at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Now that is a bad road, even though it's paved. Before reading anything in
>>>> this thread I would have applied the tags surface=asphalt,
>>>> surface_condition=rough_less_than_40 kph (used 1232 times).
>>>>
>>>> Now, I'm not sure what I'd do ;-)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Jan 4, 2014 at 8:19 AM, malenki <osm_ at malenki.ch> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Fernando Trebien wrote on Fri, 3 Jan 2014 17:56:15 -0200:
>>>>>
>>>>> >- people don't seem to agree on which tag to recommend overall to
>>>>> >  describe surface conditions: tracktype, or smoothness, or simply
>>>>> >  surface
>>>>>
>>>>> OSMers seem to agree that they need all of them.
>>>>>
>>>>> * Tracktype at least for more or less unimportant tracks,
>>>>> * Surface for the material of surface of the road
>>>>> * Smoothness at least for ways whose smoothness doesn't match the
>>>>>   smoothness one would expect when looking at the surface=value
>>>>>
>>>>> How else would you describe an asphalted road like this?:
>>>>> http://geoawesomeness.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/lidar1.jpg
>>>>> (from
>>>>>
>>>>> http://geoawesomeness.com/application-of-mobile-lidar-on-pothole-detection/)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Tagging mailing list
>>>>> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
>>>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Dave Swarthout
>>>> Homer, Alaska
>>>> Chiang Mai, Thailand
>>>> Travel Blog at http://dswarthout.blogspot.com
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Tagging mailing list
>>>> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
>>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Fernando Trebien
>>> +55 (51) 9962-5409
>>>
>>> "The speed of computer chips doubles every 18 months." (Moore's law)
>>> "The speed of software halves every 18 months." (Gates' law)
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Fernando Trebien
>> +55 (51) 9962-5409
>>
>> "The speed of computer chips doubles every 18 months." (Moore's law)
>> "The speed of software halves every 18 months." (Gates' law)
>
>
>
> --
> Fernando Trebien
> +55 (51) 9962-5409
>
> "The speed of computer chips doubles every 18 months." (Moore's law)
> "The speed of software halves every 18 months." (Gates' law)



-- 
Fernando Trebien
+55 (51) 9962-5409

"The speed of computer chips doubles every 18 months." (Moore's law)
"The speed of software halves every 18 months." (Gates' law)