[Tagging] service=rural (Was Rural Alley?)
johnw at mac.com
Sun Jul 12 23:35:32 UTC 2015
> On Jul 12, 2015, at 10:34 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdreist at gmail.com> wrote:
> agricultural traffic
The farmers access their fields using small, yet common kei trucks (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kei_truck <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kei_truck>) that are used all over Japan in urban and rural environs. There are very few slow moving tractors, as they come out only during field prep and harvest time for the rice. (twice a year?)
These roads are not just for agricultural vehicle traffic - but they are not important through ways except for very local access or for maintenance access for an aqueduct, train viaduct, or other public works that needs access for maintenance (again they’re public accessible and public routable, but not useful).
If we know that this occurs in rich countries ( well maintained yet unimportant side roads) why is adding a value to service=* a problem? we use service= for so many other things, and it seems the most appropriate here.
if a country has this separation (IMO) between unclassified/residential, service, and track - why would we map it in the city but not in the countryside? Why does it matter if it’s Ag traffic? These aren’t tractor roads. Those branch off these roads. most of the time it’s road-only cars. Does the fact that granny farms tomatoes on that road and granny cuts hair on the other road really the difference between track and alley? neither road fits the "purpose" of track, yet one is deemed to be tagged with it.
I know the reply is “then move it to unclassified” - but that muddies the meaning of unclassified. Can’t we use the same “city" scheme in the countryside when it also applies?
IMO, it applies here. The Japanese road network is as complex as a city network even in rural areas.
service=[rural or similar] seems to be the best way to *further define and document* the existing usage usage of highway=service on these roads by some mappers.
Thanks for your comments, I hope I have clarified my position further.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Tagging