[Tagging] Narrowing the application range of the smoothness tags

Szem szembiketeam at gmail.com
Wed Jan 27 11:48:31 UTC 2021

A few years ago I started collecting pictures of typical pavements I 
took on our bike tours with GoPro. I uploaded some of them here: 
I also wanted to make a much clearer system, I just didn’t have enough 
time for it.  Over the years, more than 10,000 pictures have been taken, 
if necessary I can search for a type in it if I have been through one.
I also created an excel spreadsheet that summarizes pavements and 
tracktypes.I will gladly rework or even supplement if necessary.


2021.01.27. 10:29 keltezéssel, Richard Smits via Tagging írta:
> My mail from last week has been in the moderation queue for being too 
> long, so I've cut it up in 2 parts:
> Thank you all for your reactions!
> @Andy indeed it’s much text, but I thought it was needed. I 
> re-arranged much of it in the table you can now find at 
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Key:smoothness#Making_smoothness_more_verifiable 
> Hope it’s clearer what I intend to do.
> @Peter I’m not sure I understand what you want to say. What do you 
> propose to change? I had in mind to focus on describing smoothness for 
> 4-wheeled vehicles; this smoothness can then still be applied to 
> narrow ways suitable only for 2-wheelers (if this way was wide enough 
> for a 4-wheeler, which class would be able to pass it?).
> @Stefan I hope you agree that putting the more detailed explanations 
> in an additional table column makes it clearer? If necessary, even 
> more details could be put in a separate page, like this one 
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Berlin/Verkehrswende/smoothness I 
> don’t see why we should have an even higher tier of smoothness 
> (“perfect”, maybe?) above that of “excellent” (near-perfect) because 
> even for rollers that wouldn’t make much difference in practice.
> @Graeme you’re describing the present example photo of “impassable” 
> that has been there for a long time: I agree with Andy that the 
> present example photos are more confusing than helpful. The one for 
> “good” looks less smooth than the one for “intermediate”, and the 
> “very_bad” one wouldn’t be a problem for a normal car (no need for 
> high clearance). “Smoothness” will always be somewhat subjective, like 
> many other tags used on OSM. However, I think it’s also extremely 
> useful (see here Finding the 'invisible' millions who are not on maps 
> <https://www.bbc.com/news/business-52650856> “Google and Apple maps do 
> not differentiate between a good road and a bad road - but that's so 
> important,”). My aim with the proposed changes is to make it less 
> subjective, but 100% objectivity is indeed an illusion.
>     Finding the 'invisible' millions who are not on maps
> How open map data is filling in the world's missing maps and helping 
> trace the spread of disease.
> <https://www.bbc.com/news/business-52650856>
> 1/2
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20210127/aa477ccf/attachment-0001.htm>

More information about the Tagging mailing list