[Tagging] implied surface values?

[Philip Barnes]

On Wednesday, 12 February 2020, ael wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 12, 2020 at 07:15:42PM +0100, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging wrote:
> > 
> > >> > 
> > >> In the UK too paved is implied, I have never used paved. Surface tags such as asphalt, setts, concrete add the detail of what sort of paved.
> > >>
> > >
> > > +1. Some of the Amazon people do seem to be adding unnecessary and
> > > unsurveyed surface=asphalt tags to many roads in the UK which I find
> > > quite irritating.
> > >
> > Have you tried commenting on their changesets?
> 
> Well, in the examples I have seen, they are not actually wrong. Just
> unnecessary in the UK when asphalt is the default. I know some here
> always want explicit tags, and that is fine in local conditions where
> defaults are problematic.

Asphalt is certainly not an unnecessary tag in the UK. 

Whilst its safe to assume all roads are paved unless tagged otherwise. A small number of lesser roads may not be paved.

The same assumptions cannot be made about asphalt, a significant part of the motorway and trunk expressway network are concrete, which is  evil noisy stuff and suffers from poor drainage. 

In my experience  some cars suffer handling issues on high speed concrete roads.

And of course very many residential roads are also concrete, although lower speeds mean noise and handling are not an issue.

Phil (trigpoint) 
-- 
Sent from my Sailfish device