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

David Bannon dbannon at internode.on.net
Thu Jan 16 01:04:33 UTC 2014


Seen some activity on http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User_talk:Davo

In particular, sletuffe mentions an abandoned 'usability' proposal. A
good one too.  Because it covers a wider range it could be used to
trigger different rendering at different levels depending on what the
map is intended for. So, a racing bike rider wants different thresholds
than does a 4x4 driver. 

Osmonav would like to see non numerical tags used.

General agreement "something" needs doing.

Again, everyone welcome to hack away, if you don't have a wiki logon,
send me your thoughts and I will add on your behalf.

David




On Fri, 2014-01-10 at 21:12 +1100, David Bannon wrote:
> OK folks, I have moved a draft summary of the discussion on this topic
> to my OSM wiki discussion page. Anyone with OSM Wiki credentials is
> welcome to edit it to try and make the choices clearer.
> 
> if you don't have OSM credentials, feel free to post corrections or
> additions to me and I will put them in on your behalf.
> 
> If we edit for a bit and then vote to determine what is the popular
> solution to this problem.
> 
> We can then, if appropriate, turn it into a formal proposal and really
> vote.
> 
> Please forgive me for being so late in getting this wiki page up and
> ready, been some unrelated family issues...
> 
> david
> 
> 
> On Sun, 2014-01-05 at 17:07 +1100, David Bannon wrote:
> > OK, this discussion is huge and conducted in a great manner.
> > 
> > But being so huge, I feel lost !  So, here is an attempt to summarize
> > where we are and what the options seems to be. Maybe by identifying what
> > we already agree on, we can see the way into the rest ?
> > 
> > If people think its a good idea I could post a more evolved summary onto
> > my OSM wiki page where we could all have a hack at it, might be more
> > manageable than the mailing list ? If nothing else, we need to break
> > this very complicated problem into manageable hunks.
> > 
> > Think of this somewhat like a flow chart, I just have not drawn it up...
> > 
> > Do we all agree that its important that significant maps, such as the
> > one on the OSM website, shows some indication if the road may be in a
> > state where some drivers are uncomfortable (right through to
> > dangerous) ?
> > 
> > If Yes, proceed, if No, please explain why not. You may like to address
> > this -
> > http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-11-07/25yo-man-dies-of-thirst-in-outback-queensland/4357380
> > There are lots more. Tourists from outside Australia are at particular
> > risk.
> > 
> > OK, assuming we agree we want 'something' ...
> > 
> > We need some tag (or tags) associated with a way that tells a rendering
> > engine this way is one that might need caution. We can try and use
> > existing tags or invent a new one. 
> > 
> > The "new one" option (such as BGNO's trafficability) could be tuned,
> > based on experience, to do exactly what we want. On the other hand there
> > are currently no ways in the database using that new tag. There are 3
> > million surface= and 2.5 million tracktype= tags in there. Mappers put
> > used those tags in there for a reason. 
> > 
> > If you want a new tag defined, please say so, maybe with a new subject ?
> > 
> > Continuing on, assuming we support using existing tags, which ones ? At
> > lease three 'approved' candidates, four if you include 4wd_only.
> > 
> > Surface= has about 3 million ways that are what we, in Oz, call
> > 'unsealed', dirt, sand, gravel, unpaved and so on. This is not a bad fit
> > but neither is it perfect. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Surface
> > "To provide additional information about the physical surface of
> > roads/footpaths...." However, my experience is that a precise statement
> > about the surface does not necessarily relate to its
> > "trafficability" (thanks for the term BGNO!). I have driven sandy roads
> > that were so easy and somewhere else, spent a day with a shovel digging
> > through sand. Similarly, hard packed clay can sometimes be preferable to
> > a made gravel road that has developed severe corrugations. And a sealed,
> > tarmac road that is breaking up is a nightmare.
> > 
> > Tracktype= has about 2.5 million grade2 and beyond ways. "Tracktype is a
> > measure of how well-maintained a track or other minor road is."
> > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tracktype
> > Thats a lot closer to what someone (or a router) might be wanting to
> > know. It can and should be applied to all sorts of highway= ways, not
> > just =track and that seems to be a major problem. In some people's view
> > (Malenki..), it should be used only when highway=track. I and several
> > other people (and the wiki) disagree. The values of Tracktype are not
> > intuitive. The values are linearly expandable, to cover more extreme
> > road conditions, grade6 is already widely used but not approved.
> > 
> > Smoothness= has about 25 thousand ways. Thats drawing the line at
> > very_bad. But there are another 40 thousand 'bads' so its hard to call.
> > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:smoothness
> > I am personally convinced this tag would be used heaps more if the
> > values did not seem to make some moral judgment ! As I said before, I
> > could never label the pretty road I live on as "horrible".
> > There is some support for making a new set of values and that would be
> > cool (Fernando, Martin). But has the horse already bolted ? Surface= and
> > tracktype each have more than 100 times more use.  Further, if we come
> > up with new values, why not a new name ? Truth is, 'smoothness' is only
> > a small aspect of trafficability (there, I used it again!).
> > 
> > 4wd_only=yes.  Used 3 thousand times, more in Australia than elsewhere.
> > In hindsight, maybe it could have done with at least three values,
> > 'recommended', 'yes', 'extreme'. It does cut in somewhat beyond the spot
> > we are talking about, I get the impression that people want a road
> > labeled differently long before we get to 4wd_only=recommended.
> > 
> > Any one of the above, or a combination ? Personally, I think a
> > combination would be over complicating it. Just my view.
> > 
> > 
> > Other Issues -
> > 
> > How to render it ?  That can come later on I guess.
> > 
> > Wolfgang, Peter, Janko, Gerald  warns about subjective tags. Truth is,
> > almost everything we record is subjective to some degree. I'd take the
> > legal approach where they talk about a "reason person's view". For a
> > normal road, thats someone driving a conventional car. For a mountain
> > bike track, its someone riding a mountain bike....
> > Fernando pointed out that to make a truly objective assessment, we'd
> > need many more tags and some elaborate technology to measure. Gerald
> > suggested a smartphone app to do the measuring but is he allowing for
> > variation of suspension in the vehicle in use ?
> > David S and Dominic don't seem to want more detailed measures either.
> > 
> > David S reminds us what highway= tag is about. Its to describe the
> > purpose of a road, not in any way its "trafficability" (David S said
> > "usability but I am starting to like trafficability...). he is right but
> > the anomaly is highway=track, its use opens up, at present, the
> > tracktype modifiers, wrong, wrong....
> > 
> > One important effect of the highway= tag is "more important" roads get
> > rendered at lower zoom numbers. Useful when you want to see how to get
> > from A to B. Sadly, we hear of people taging important roads as =track
> > so their usability can be described by tracktype. And then you cannot
> > see them at all at sensible zoom levels. Sigh....
> > 
> > 
> > Now, I have not mentioned everyone nor every view, impossible !  Thats
> > why I think its time to move to the wiki, perhaps show a series of
> > options and just see who really wants to vote for what.
> > 
> > But, I really must thank Fernando for driving this issue, its very, very
> > important and damn hard as well !
> > 
> > 
> > David
> > 
> > On Fri, 2014-01-03 at 21:10 -0200, Fernando Trebien wrote:
> > >  a massive contribution...
> > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Tagging mailing list
> > Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging





More information about the Tagging mailing list