[Tagging] Proposed rewrite Of highway=track wiki page - Third Draft

Peter Elderson pelderson at gmail.com
Thu Apr 8 06:57:03 UTC 2021


Great job! Two remarks:
1.
Recreation is mentioned twice: first in "outdoor recreation" (track
recommended) and second in "recreation grounds" (use service instead).
I'm not British enough to know if outdoor recreation is sufficiently
different from recreation grounds. But hey, that probably goes for most of
the world! In my mind, outdoor recreation often takes place on recreation
grounds.

2.
"Low importance roads" in the definition: that is, from a certain
viewpoint. In other respects, a track can be very important, e.g. in terms
of damages if it's blocked. Maybe just say minor roads, as you do a few
times later on?

Peter Elderson


Op wo 7 apr. 2021 om 17:06 schreef Zeke Farwell <ezekielf at gmail.com>:

> All good points raised.  Let me just provide some context for why I chose
> certain phrases.
>
> In an earlier draft I used the phrase "minor land access roads".  I
> received feedback that the word minor may not be clear enough when
> translated into other languages so I changed it to "low importance land
> access roads".  "low usage" could also work but I think "minor" or "low
> importance" is preferable.  It really is about the relative importance in
> the road network in the same way we decide if unclassified, tertiary,
> secondary, etc is appropriate.  track is of lower importance to the network
> than these other classifications.
>
> Re: "regular road network".  This is indeed vague, but it does seem to be
> a concept that many mappers have in their minds.  I received feedback
> stating that track roads are something less than a regular road, not part
> of the public network, and various other statements to that effect.  It
> sounds like in Germany there is even a legal distinction between "roads"
> (Straße) and "ways" (Wege).  In other countries it seems to be more of a
> general idea separating "roads everyone uses" from "ways that aren't quite
> roads but some motor vehicles use".  Perhaps there is a better way to
> phrase it, but I think this additional qualification beyond simply "land
> access roads" is useful.  There are roads in remote areas of North America
> that could easily be considered "land access roads" because there is
> nothing but open land around them, but track is not the appropriate
> classification as they do serve as a connection between very distant
> towns.
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20210408/a737f32b/attachment-0001.htm>


More information about the Tagging mailing list