[Tagging] Use of highway=track vs highway=service cemeteries, parks, allotment gardens, golf courses, and recreation areas

[brad]

I don't think anyone is arguing 'that a track cannot be used for paved 
roads and ... highway=service roads should be paved'.    stevea simply 
suggested that that was how he used to do it.   That said, I've never 
seen a paved way that I would tag as a track.

On 2/26/21 11:15 AM, Bert -Araali- Van Opstal wrote:
>
> Of course, well noticed Christoph, thank you for clarifying I mixed it 
> up in that sentence. Perfectly correct how we apply it in Africa.
>
> Also in support of Florian's statement. Exactly that is how we applied 
> it in Africa, but there are more countries where this general 
> principle is applied successfully, like South-America ans most Asian 
> countries.
>
> In my opinion the US group, requesting for the amendment and 
> clarification in the general description look at it from a too narrow 
> local perspective.  No where does it explicitly say that a track 
> cannot be used for paved roads, nowhere does it say that 
> highway=service roads should be paved.  That was like this even before 
> we had the surface=* tag.
> We use highway=service tag for any road that is not intended for 
> general public use, very clear and worked sofar in thousands of 
> applications worldwide.
>
> Tracks could be improved, and should, and is, to be used on any road 
> which doesn't fall under any other classification and is intended, 
> either in full, or partially for public use.  Highway=service for any 
> road where it is not for public use, and the access is restrained by 
> some access restrictions (preferable to be tagged separately) or 
> because it's located in an area with access restrictions or private 
> property.  We should not consider it as being by definition in an 
> agricultural or rural context.  For example: a highway that is 
> intended for firefighting access in a publicly accessible part of a 
> forest, where at the same time it is used for hiking by the public, 
> will be a track.  The same highway at some part might enter a private 
> part of the same forest, it is not accessible for the general public, 
> so there yo split it and it becomes a highway=service.
> Regardless if it is paved or not, the public factor is the 
> distinguishing factor in these case, meaning, the functional 
> classification.
>
> Another example is that a publicly accessible track, unpaved, which 
> might be paved over time, if the pure fact that it becomes paved 
> without changing it's socio-economic character or functionality, 
> remains a track.
>
> Greetings,
>
> Bert Araali
>
> On 26/02/2021 19:13, Christoph Hormann wrote:
>> On Thursday 25 February 2021, Bert -Araali- Van Opstal wrote:
>>> The standard highway tagging is mainly based on the physical
>>> appearance.  Not the functional or just partly the socio-economic
>>> importance.
>> The opposite is the case - standard highway tagging - with the exception
>> of highway=motorway - is almost purely functional in OSM.  There are
>> some exceptions from that in local practice (like distinction between
>> highway=trunk and highway=primary in Germany for example).  But overall
>> all of the main road classes are overwhelmingly used with a functional
>> semantic delineation.  This is also something data users (both
>> cartographic and routing) massively rely on.
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20210226/3ee2375f/attachment-0001.htm>