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

Bert -Araali- Van Opstal bert.araali.afritastic at gmail.com
Mon Mar 1 12:25:38 UTC 2021

Thank you Graeme for raising the issue in Australia, and the reply you 
listed here proposes to look in the same way as I was thinking about 
I took a short look at your local tagging guidelines and they look super 
and very complete, we can get a lot of good ideas there to develop ours, 
especially how you list, integrate and approach the indigenous peoples 
rights. Really, huge respect from me to the Australian community !

Regarding the highway tagging we are trying to improve here, are their 
other sources besides 
that we should look at that might be of any help ?


Bert Araali

On 01/03/2021 07:55, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:
> The subject of tracks has also been discussed on the Australian list 
> over this last week or so, partially as an off-shoot of this thread.
> One of the blokes has made this suggestion:
> "road surfaces change, both overtime and the length of the
> road and there is also the perception of the user.
> The Wiki appears to be a shemozzle and it might be a great place to start
> so that in the future we have a uniformed and easy to understand. The
> Taginfo query shows confusion from the editor suggestions and doesn't allow
> easy use by third party apps to render tracks etc.
> Could consideration be made to move to a two tier system of surface=paved,
> unpaved and then surface:paved=* and surface:unpaved=* ? Coupling this with
> smoothness would make the data easier to digest and we could merge the
> duplicates or extend the schema to surface:unpaved:gravel=course
> surface:unpaved:gravel=fine etc. ?"
> Definitely worth thinking about!
> Thanks
> Graeme
> On Mon, 1 Mar 2021 at 06:30, stevea <steveaOSM at softworkers.com 
> <mailto:steveaOSM at softworkers.com>> wrote:
>     On Feb 28, 2021, at 4:22 AM, Bert -Araali- Van Opstal
>     <bert.araali.afritastic at gmail.com
>     <mailto:bert.araali.afritastic at gmail.com>> wrote:
>     > ... but many of use don't have this historical background, this
>     global view. It does however illustrate how the current
>     classification causes so much confusion, socio-economic, physical
>     appearance, function, legally defined access restrictions, and it
>     seems they are all mixed. Maybe we should go for a more general
>     review, allow and describe the different nature of classifications
>     or at least guidance in how they can and are intended to be used.
>     Thank you Bert for identifying the crux of what appears to be a
>     serious, burgeoning problem in OSM:  that of confusion in
>     classification (of highways) among various world regions. (It's
>     not new, it's been going on since the start of OSM). This feels to
>     me to be a potentially fruitful result of this thread. 
>     Personally, I'm not sure what to do to immediately fix / help, as
>     it continues to be a large mountain to climb, but again,
>     identifying such a problem is often the first step in having any
>     hope or chance of bettering the situation or outright solving it. 
>     I did not know that the East Africa Tagging Guidelines existed,
>     let alone offer important "how to tag around here" navigations for
>     many volunteer mappers. Clearly, these conversations exist and
>     have been ongoing for some time, but (amazingly!) this is the
>     first intersection of them (to my knowledge) with the tagging list
>     and for that I am thankful to Bert, Joseph and others (many in the
>     HOT group, it seems).  The "general review" that you suggest is an
>     excellent next step IMO, although it will take significant
>     resources I personally cannot contribute except to shine a bright
>     light that "here continues to be a significant tagging challenge
>     that needs to be addressed globally."  I wish us good luck here! 
>     (A "task group?"  Bert connecting with people who are more
>     familiar with the specifics of this broader problem than it
>     appears to many on this list?  People on this list who have just
>     had their perspective shifted and now know better how to address
>     Bert's issues with aplomb and more-concrete answers? I'm
>     exhausting my personal resources here).
>     >>> (Tagging is) a very closed group, and that it gets hostile
>     sometimes because some people who for long participate in it, feel
>     like the current tagging and mapping behaviours, and wiki is their
>     "work". In some sense it is of course, but the result of that work
>     is not reflected in general good mapping and tagging behaviours. 
>     So the "work" is not done, and it will never be, be more open and
>     less hostile for the new emerging OSM mapping communities, views
>     and interpretations, "scope" perceptions, without feeling abused
>     or attacked for the hard work you have done so far, or what OSM
>     has become. Due to the demographics of these new emerging groups,
>     most of them young people, they have the perception that the work
>     being done so far is not that great, that they can do better, new
>     views are not heard, talk groups considered irrelevant and they
>     rebel by doing what they want, because they can, they will if they
>     find they are not being heard or respected. It has the potential
>     to make this whole group, the whole of the OSM project irrelevant
>     to them and to create their own fork, within or outside the OSM
>     community.
>     >>> That's why we locally tend to map these as residential roads.
>     I get it that (especially younger) newcomers to OSM see what they
>     see and think "this isn't that great, we can do better..." as I
>     have experienced this before with mappers in my area in exactly
>     the same way.  While it is work to do this, I (as an "elder" in
>     your context) find that what I can and do share is this:  Many
>     contributors doing our best have worked on this (map) for many
>     years with the best of our abilities to speak with one voice. 
>     Sometimes, what we have done looks scattered, or like it doesn't
>     knit together well, or even worse, that it seems to not provide a
>     good foundation for newer voices to contribute to the harmony (or
>     "emerging harmony").  You identify problems and deficiencies and
>     as you do, we all see there are indeed problems.  However, what
>     OSM now has is the (solid) foundation that there is.  It is not
>     perfect, but it is good, even very good.  Part of making it as
>     good as it is and as excellent as it can be is finding ways to
>     improve it in the context of how it gets improved, as difficult as
>     that seems at first.  We would all like a map that has ready-made
>     the tools, data and instructions that it takes to continue to map
>     the globe as well as we can, but we must also recognize that for
>     those of us who have the skills to not only map, but improve these
>     other (infrastructural) aspects of OSM, we must improve its
>     infrastructure where we can, too.  (Sometimes tagging changes,
>     sometimes wiki modifications...).  Some newer users will be put
>     off by this, others will embrace it and see it as an important
>     part of the work that must be done to continue to build the map: 
>     their (YOUR!) specific knowledge of streets and their sorts of
>     traffic and use that they have (in YOUR part of the world, how
>     people around YOU do things).  Yes, it is difficult when that
>     differs significantly from how things are done now.  But an
>     important and wonderful part of OSM is that it has the ability to
>     grow into these in positive ways, with many voices mapping with
>     harmony.  This takes work, work that is of a different nature than
>     simply "read a wiki and learn, then go map" which is what many
>     would like to believe they can do.  Many can. Yet some, in some
>     parts of the world, are more challenged than that.  So, this elder
>     requests of you that you recognize that and please (very much
>     please) learn how to build the sorts of structures it takes to do
>     that.  We eagerly want to help with specifics, we want to answer
>     your questions.  OSM (as this tagging list's participants) do not
>     want to dismiss anybody with "go do this research..." when what
>     you identify is that you are asking US for this research.  (And I
>     apologize for having done that; I'll endeavor to better answer
>     specific questions if, as and when I can).  Bert, in your case (in
>     this list and threads), you are doing a superb job of helping the
>     whole world help you and others in your part of the world do this
>     better.  We are all one map in one world and while the "plain
>     vanilla" methods of tagging work for a lot of us, there really are
>     strawberry and pistachio flavors, too.  The (mildly unfortunate)
>     thing is, a lot of people have gotten used to "vanilla" as "the
>     only and single, one right way to do things."  This elder says
>     "there are many flavors in the world."  We have methods to improve
>     things so that everybody can not only enjoy their flavor of ice
>     cream, but that a taste of another can be delicious and satisfying
>     too.
>     I don't know how this will eventually play out in the specific
>     case of "highway=track vs. highway=service (parks, golf
>     courses...)" all over the world.  But we are on the right track
>     when we hold all of the above in mind and know that the many
>     flavors existing simultaneously (somehow) WILL win in the end.  It
>     simply has to be this way, because this is how the world is, and
>     OSM really is doing a good job of modeling the actual world.  Yes,
>     we have some work to do to BETTER model some parts of the world
>     that don't quite fit into the same model as other parts, this is
>     simply part of being a global project.  And as vanilla is no
>     "better" than strawberry, nor vice versa, we must simply co-exist
>     — because there ARE these various flavors of how the world is and
>     how OSM models it.  I know this is much easier said than done. 
>     But sometimes saying it is the first, best, early step we can do
>     to get there.  I'm glad we appear to be doing some of that here
>     and I thank all who both have done it before and recognize that it
>     is hard work.
>     >> In our cultures, we ask the elders to get historical context,
>     and they are very willing to help us.  The answers might not be
>     simple, might be long and might be not always all revealing, but
>     the elders at least provide them. Here, you get hostile answers by
>     just go there and there, use tool A, B, C and D to find out, don't
>     ask us because we are tired of providing the same context and
>     answers over and over again. We can't, and that is why we ask, and
>     that is if you want to be an open community, at least try to
>     answer these kind of questions. I don't want to be referred to yet
>     another help channel, another tool, spend days and days to
>     research OSM's history, because I can't. Not from just an
>     economical perspective but many of us also from an educational and
>     cultural background are unable to do this.
>     I hope I stand tall in that tradition here (even as there is much
>     more work to do), and ask that others here do so, too. Such
>     respect is crucial.  What Bert identifies is a very important
>     aspect of how the respectful transfer of "knowledge" and "how"
>     happens.  Period.  Not simply in his culture or part of the world,
>     but "period, full stop."  These are valuable traditions everywhere
>     because, simply, "they work."  They deserve our respect.  In OSM
>     there is every reason to continue these traditions.
>     We can help each other greatly by both recognizing this context of
>     knowledge transmission and respecting that there might be some
>     rough edges at understanding that sometimes, additional words,
>     time or clarity can be required before the right sorts of
>     questions are asked to get to the right sorts of answers or
>     guidance.  We must offer wide latitude of cross-cultural patience
>     and allow wonder and awe (that's my experience with such things)
>     as they happen.  For example, even staying within my own locality,
>     one (younger) group of local mappers had such a profound
>     difference of understanding of the map from me that even though
>     these differences might be explained as simply "generational," we
>     were all able to learn from each other, and in the end, not only
>     did the map become a better map, but wiki were improved, skills
>     were deepened rather broadly and understanding became mutual,
>     although, this wasn't always easy and it did take time.  So, it
>     can be done, and people can end up becoming friends rather than
>     contentious with each other!  Listening skills, asking for help in
>     ways that might seem different or uncomfortable, providing answers
>     that might seem obvious at first or take a great deal of thought,
>     dialog and research are all important.  Be open-hearted and
>     listen, please.
>     I wish the focus to swing back to Bert's specific questions, as
>     I've zoomed out pretty far and want to zoom back in to help him. 
>     I think we all do!  Thanks in advance to all here who can push
>     this forward in ways I can't.
>     _______________________________________________
>     Tagging mailing list
>     Tagging at openstreetmap.org <mailto:Tagging at openstreetmap.org>
>     https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>     <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/20210301/1ecda564/attachment-0001.htm>

More information about the Tagging mailing list