[Talk-GB] Unfit for motors - tagging for routing

Peter Rounce peter at rounce.me.uk
Mon Dec 10 15:10:13 GMT 2012

from the wiki

motor_vehicl <http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:motor_vehicle>e=no
Access permission for any motorized vehicle

these routes do have access permission, but are signed as unsuitable/unfit
which is more advisory

Best Wishes

On 10 December 2012 14:30, Aidan McGinley
<aidmcgin+openstreetmap at gmail.com>wrote:

> motor_vehicl <http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:motor_vehicle>e=no
> should suffice I would have thought?
> On 10 December 2012 13:36, cotswolds mapper <osmcotswolds at gmail.com>wrote:
>> There are lots of roads where I map which have "Unfit for motors" signs
>> (blue/white advisory) but are normal maintained roads in limited but
>> regular use. Typically they are narrowish, with lots of bends and often
>> steep. In general anything up to maybe the size of a skip lorry can get
>> through (though some are too narrow), but what makes them unfit for motors
>> is very long stretches without passing places,so if you meet something
>> coming the other way, one of you has a very long, difficult reverse.
>> They are currently tagged in OSM as minor roads, which of course means
>> they are eligible for routing. As an example, most (all?) routing services
>> (not just OSM-based, Google Maps has the same problem) will route Chalford
>> Hill to Stroud along Dark Lane, but Dark Lane has an "Unfit for motors"
>> sign.  It's the shortest and most direct route from the A419 to most of
>> Chalford Hill, but very few locals use it.
>> I'd like to tag these roads so that routing services will avoid them, but
>> can't find any direct way of doing this. I've seen elsewhere that one
>> mapper has tagged similar roads as Service roads. This has two advantages:
>> routing services will ignore them(?); and service roads render differently
>> so anyone using the map visually will be less likely to use these roads.
>> It's pushing the current definition of service road rather a lot, but if
>> you consider a service road to be a road that should only be used to access
>> locations connected to the service road, then it seems within the spirit of
>> the definition.
>> There's a specific issue with Chalford Hill at the moment. Road closures
>> (due to collapsed retaining walls) mean that the popular routes to the
>> valley (Old Neighbourhood and to a lesser extent Coppice Hill) are closed
>> and likely to remain so for over a month. My local source (a parish
>> councilor) says that most locals are using a long diversion and avoiding
>> Dark Lane. (Traffic on Dark Lane has increased, and there was recently a
>> fist fight when two cars met and neither driver would reverse. Locals want
>> to make it temporarily one way, which would massively increase its
>> usefulness, but there's no quick way of doing this.)
>> My two questions:
>> 1) Should OSM data discourage use of routes that locals -  who are likely
>> to be better than outsiders at coping with narrow lanes - avoid as too
>> problematic;
>> 2) Is tagging usable but 'Unfit for motors' roads as service roads an
>> acceptable way of doing this or is there a better method (that is
>> recognised by current renderers and routing engines).
>> As my opinion on (1) is yes, I've tagged Dark Lane and a couple of even
>> more difficult roads as service roads, at least for the duration of the
>> road closures, but will happily revert the tag if there's a better way.
>> Rob
>> _______________________________________________
>> Talk-GB mailing list
>> Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org
>> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/attachments/20121210/45a8fb12/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the Talk-GB mailing list