[talk-au] surface tag

[Ben Kelley]

Hi.

Common usage is that surface=paved is any kind of sealed road including
asphalt.

  - Ben Kelley
 On Oct 24, 2012 9:23 AM, "Andrew Laughton" <laughton.andrew at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi People
>
> Sorry if this has already been stated, I have not mapped since the
> licence change and I am only reading some emails.
>
> I my humble opinion, surface=unpaved should not be used.
> surface=paved should only be used is the surface is literally paved
> with brick, bluestone, cobblestone, whatever.
> surface=asphalt should be used for asphalt or bitumen.
> surface=gravel should be used for gravel roads.
> surface=dirt should be used if there is no surface covering, the track
> has been literally made out of whatever the ground is made out of.
> Think fire breaks.
> surface=sand where there is no surface covering, but the ground is
> sand or very sandy.
> surface=concrete for concrete bike or walking tracks.
> surface=wood for wooden walkways, jetty's and so forth.
>
> I even have a faint memory of using surface=grass, where the track was
> very overgrown, but too many tags might not be so good for rendering
> machines.
>
> I do not think I ever used it, but I think there is a smoothness tag
> which might be worth some research if you are worried about a track
> falling between 4x4_only=[recommended; yes;no].
> The 4x4_only tag might be better left to legal definitions set by rangers.
>
> As well as a speed_limit tag, thought should be given to a speed_avg tag.
> Some roads might have a legal speed limit of 100 kmh, but you can be
> lucky to get out of second gear because of the rough road surface, or
> even heavily used roads that are normally very crowded, and the
> average speed is actually not very fast.
> The speed_avg tag would be handy for routing engines.
>
> My 2 cents worth.
>
> Andrew.
>
>
>
>
> On 21 October 2012 12:03,  <dbannon at internode.on.net> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Folks, recent I have been going over parts of OSM mapped some time
> ago,
> > following up on the infamous redaction. One thing that jumps out at me is
> > the inconsistent tagging of dirt roads. Even, I must say, ones I have
> done
> > myself but over a several year time span.
> >
> > So I started to write some notes for myself and thought that maybe I
> should
> > add them to http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Roads_Tagging I
> > don't think this is inconsistent with whats there now, just more
> detailed.
> > However, I do suggest that we need consider what the rendering engines do
> > with our data and I know that is a bit naughty. But, in this case, I'd
> > suggest to do otherwise is negligent as it can have quite serious safety
> > issues.
> >
> > So, would people like to comment on what I say here ? If we can reach
> > consensus, I'll graft some of it onto the OSM wiki.
> >
> > Unmade roads
> >
> > These are typically forestry and remote tracks, while they may have been
> cut
> > initially by a bulldozer they are not regularly maintained and,
> importantly,
> > are not domed and don't have good run off gutters on the side. Such roads
> > might or might not be single lane, 4x4 only, might be dry weather etc. Be
> > careful about deciding on such restrictions, some people are often
> surprised
> > at how well a carefully driven conventional vehicle can use these tracks.
> > Highway=track will typically render to a dashed line.
> > highway=track
> > surface=unpaved
> > lanes=[1; 2]
> > 4x4_only=[recommended; yes]
> > source=survey
> >
> > Made but unsealed roads.
> >
> > Many rural roads fit here. There is no asphalt but the roads are 'made'
> and
> > regularly maintained by, eg, the local council. These roads often have a
> > gravel base, always have dome shape, the middle is somewhat higher than
> the
> > sides and there is some sort of gutter at the edge. The gutter will
> usually
> > have "run offs" to drain water away from the road. Such roads are almost
> > never 4x4_only nor dry weather only.
> > highway=[unclassified; tertiary, secondary]
> > surface=unpaved
> > lanes=[1; 2]
> > source=survey
> >
> > Use of the highway tag on dirt roads.
> >
> > While the selection of tags should not be defined by how current
> rendering
> > engines display, we cannot ignore the final outcome. In Australia, a lot
> of
> > dirt roads are quite important and sometimes its necessary to compromise
> a
> > little to achieve a useful result. So the correct highway tag may be
> > determined by a combination of the purpose of the road and its condition.
> > Tracks are often rendered as dashed lines and most people would
> understand
> > that means some care may well be needed. Unclassified would indicate a
> > purely local function and is typically rendered as two thin black lines
> with
> > white between Tertiary  roads usually are rendered with two black lines
> and
> > a coloured fill and many people (incorrectly) interpret that as meaning a
> > sealed road, so maybe mappers should ensure they apply that tag only to
> dirt
> > roads that are reasonably well maintained. Secondary roads are shown as
> > wider and a different colour than tertiary and are definitely presented
> as
> > viable routes for people passing through the area. Some care needs be
> > exercised if a dirt road is to be classified as 'secondary'.
> >
> >
> > Discussion
> >
> > Sometimes its hard to balance the description of a road against its
> purpose.
> > A good example might be the Plenty Highway. This road is probably a track
> > from a road condition perspective, rarely maintained, sections of sand,
> > corrugations and ruts. However, its pretty long and a major link between
> > some (admittedly small) communities. As a 'track' it would not show up
> on a
> > map until you zoom in way past where you can get any idea of where it
> starts
> > and ends. At time of writing, its highway=primary (and, I might note,
> > incomplete), that's possibly dangerously misleading. Conventional
> vehicles
> > routinely use it but I'd probably give it a 4x4_only=recommended tag.
> > However, none of the mainstream rendering engines observe that tag, it
> is no
> > real protection for a visiting tourist.
> >
> > Similarly, even on the east coast, its not unusual to see dirt roads
> defined
> > as 'tertiary' or even 'secondary'. Thats probably quite correct from a
> > purpose view but a lot of (especially city based) drivers get quite
> nervous
> > when they find themselves on a dirt road. If they have got there by
> > following a OSM map showing a road with coloured fill, maybe they have a
> > case ? Most printed maps here in Australia show unsealed roads without a
> > coloured fill.
> >
> > And this does, of course, highlight the need to survey roads.
> >
> > David
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Talk-au mailing list
> > Talk-au at openstreetmap.org
> > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-au mailing list
> Talk-au at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/attachments/20121024/5fa4e3a2/attachment.html>