[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - trafficability

[Wolfgang Hinsch]

Am Montag, den 06.01.2014, 12:29 +0100 schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer:
> 2014/1/6 Wolfgang Hinsch <osm-listen at ivkasogis.de>
> 
> > Perhaps the tag 'surface_condition=*' would be more appropriate to
> > describe the state of the surface.
> >
> > A way with surface=cobblestone may have a surface_condition=excellent,
> > nevertheless it's impassable for bicycles and time consuming for motor cars
> >
> 
> 
> Then what would be the implication for
> surface=rock, surface_condition=excellent

passable at nearly every weather condition. Possibly dangerous if
weather is frosty.

You can interpret the implication of every surface/surface_condition
pair according to the type of vehicle you or your target group will use.

> or surface=ground in mint condition?

passable if weather is fine, while and after rain possibly impassable or
hard to pass, way is used mainly on foot, otherwise it would not be in
mint condition.

> 
> maybe "surface_condition" could be useful for a very few set of surface
> types, especially surface=asphalt, but also there you would want to have

I think it makes sense at nearly every type of surface.

> more precise info on the state for the bad conditions (type, location and
> shape of damage).

??

Location of damage is the tagged part of the way. Shape of damage is the
value of surface_condition. Type of damage can be added if appropriate
(e.g. damage=potholed). But I think it makes no difference why the
surface is in bad condition. 

If the damage consists of a hole of 10 m depth and you need
mountaineering equipment to pass then the way should be closed because
there is temporary none. Or the damaged part is trail,
sec_scale=demanding_alpine_hiking ;-)

cheers, 
Wolfgang