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

Warin 61sundowner at gmail.com
Sat Apr 10 12:19:43 UTC 2021

On 8/4/21 4:57 pm, Peter Elderson wrote:
> 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?

Low importance roads may become very important .. say in a flood, fire 
or landslip.

Possibly 'normally low traffic' ? If 'important' then would it not have 
an appropriate traffic level?

> Peter Elderson
> Op wo 7 apr. 2021 om 17:06 schreef Zeke Farwell <ezekielf at gmail.com 
> <mailto: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 <mailto:Tagging at openstreetmap.org>
>     https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20210410/e4b4f0e1/attachment.htm>

More information about the Tagging mailing list