[Tagging] highway = track vs. residential
matkoniecz at gmail.com
Sat Jan 9 15:31:40 UTC 2016
On Sat, 9 Jan 2016 15:02:19 +0100
Wolfgang Zenker <wolfgang at lyxys.ka.sub.org> wrote:
> * Mateusz Konieczny <matkoniecz at gmail.com> [160109 13:12]:
> > On Fri, 8 Jan 2016 10:50:37 +0100
> > Wolfgang Zenker <wolfgang at lyxys.ka.sub.org> wrote:
> >> * Tod Fitch <tod at fitchdesign.com> [160107 23:35]:
> >>> My parents house is in a pretty rural part of Arizona and
> >>> distinguishing between tracks and driveways or even residential
> >>> roads can be difficult there. So my initial instinct was to say
> >>> leave the ways in that part of Colorado as tracks as it can be
> >>> hard to tell on the imagery.
> >>> But looking at the satellite imagery in the area you linked, they
> >>> clearly look like unpaved residential roads and dirt driveways.
> >>> I’d leave the driveways in but change the tagging to:
> >>> highway=service
> >>> service=driveway
> >>> surface=unpaved
> >>> access=private
> >> I would do almost the same, but would leave out the access=private,
> >> as this is difficult to determine from the aerial imagery, and is
> >> implied for service=driveway anyway.
> > I would strongly dispute "implied for service=driveway anyway" - in
> > some cases service=driveway is accessible for everybody, in
> > many cases it is accessible at least for foot traffic.
> I agree that at least in most of Europe it would usually be
> access=destination rather than access=private. However, I don't
> think that any routing engine should route through traffic over
I would expect routers for foot and bicycle traffic to use
also ways with service=driveway (except ones explicitly tagged as
More information about the Tagging