pieren3 at gmail.com
Fri Mar 21 10:10:35 UTC 2014
On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 1:09 AM, Fernando Trebien
<fernando.trebien at gmail.com> wrote:
> If so many people agree that the current values are inappropriate
"smoothness" was very controversial from its beginning. It is not used
by any data consumer and probably will never be in the future (for the
reasons already reported here). But people use it.
> let's write a proposal for the new
> values, get it approved (should be easy) and recommend against using
> the old (current) values.
Your new values remembers me an older proposal:
There might be some others since this discussion is not really new.
> highway=path + smoothness=off_road_wheels + tracktype=grade2 +
> mtb:scale=3 + sac_scale=mountain_hiking + surface=rocky
I think in general, we should clearly distinguish "practicability"
tags for tracks and paths because it's not the same type of
transportation (4 wheels vehicles for "track" and mtb, (atv),
off-road motocycles, pedestrians for "path"). Please keep "mtb:scale"
and "sac_scale" for paths/footways and "tracktype" for tracks.
Otherwise it will be very confusing for everyone.
> highway=path + smoothness=robust_wheels + tracktype=grade4 +
> mtb:scale=0 + sac_scale=hiking + surface=earth
This example is a track for me.
More information about the Tagging