[Tagging] Proper way to tag highways located in "dangerous" areas

Ralph Dell RDell at CatawbaCountyNC.gov
Mon Nov 21 14:06:39 UTC 2016

-----Original Message-----
From: Frederik Ramm [mailto:frederik at remote.org] 
Sent: Sunday, November 20, 2016 6:39 PM
To: tagging at openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Tagging] Proper way to tag highways located in "dangerous" areas


On 11/17/2016 08:42 PM, Paul Johnson wrote:
> I don't think it's appropriate to put into the main toolchain or map 
> data in itself; would be better off as your own specialized mashup 
> keeping in mind that enormous can of worms...

I agree; there are lots of other interesting things that might be useful for routing, for example how likely it is to step into dog poo, how rainy the weather is in an area, how loud during rush hour or how dark at night; how accident-prone an intersection or how beautiful the landscape. Some of these are clearly non objective, others can be pseudo-objective like the crime figures but they'll often be biased, or not comparable across jurisdictions or even cities... I think adding any of this to OSM would move us away from being a database of easily observable facts, into the realm where people will fight endlessly about what the facts really are.

Let's not go there. Let's stick to "if two people cannot agree what to put in OSM, let them meet at the place in question, see things with their own eyes, and settle the argument". Anything that cannot be resolved that way (or, by extension, through a photo or sending someone else to go and look) will only cause trouble.

For all the tagging that can be done, dangerous or similar is just a terrible idea.


Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frederik at remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"

Tagging mailing list
Tagging at openstreetmap.org

More information about the Tagging mailing list