[Talk-us] cycle.travel US bike routing, and unreviewed rural TIGER

Russ Nelson nelson at crynwr.com
Sun Jun 21 03:40:31 UTC 2015


There's really two kinds of cycling: including trails and unpaved
roads because your bicycle has nobblies and springs, and not. The
first are fine with such roads, and the second very much not. I've
done both types of cycling, and with high pressure narrow tyres
(that's a nod to Richard, so he feels more at home here), gravel roads
are worse than a boot to the head.

Harald Kliems writes:
 > Richard, I would somewhat caution against penalizing unpaved roads too
 > much. In many areas of the US they actually make wonderful cycling routes,
 > whereas the paved alternatives are high traffic and unpleasant to ride on.
 > Of course, proper smoothness tagging would help but that will be a long way
 > coming. Until then you could consider a user setting to avoid/not avoid
 > unpaved roads.
 >  Harald.
 > 
 > On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 2:48 PM Richard Fairhurst <richard at systemed.net>
 > wrote:
 > 
 > > Just as a postscript to this discussion I thought I'd cite an example area.
 > > If you look here, in Georgia:
 > >
 > >    http://cycle.travel/map?lat=31.9023&lon=-84.0398&zoom=14
 > >
 > > you'll see that most of the roads are unreviewed TIGER residentials. Of
 > > those, these are adjacent to each other:
 > >
 > > http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/9359782 - good tarmac, should be
 > > highway=tertiary
 > > http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/9359913 - unpaved road;
 > > highway=unclassified, surface=unpaved
 > > http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/9359784 - probably tertiary, but lousy
 > > geometry at the S
 > > http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/9359783 - whoops, where did the
 > > connectivity go?
 > >
 > > All of this is trivially fixable but right now there's no way of using them
 > > for routing or sensible cartography. Do dive in - the cycle.travel
 > > rendering
 > > makes it obvious which bits need fixing, and you learn to identify the
 > > roads
 > > which are likely to be paved through roads and therefore targets to fix.
 > > It's quite good fun. :)
 > >
 > > cheers
 > > Richard
 > >
 > >
 > >
 > >
 > >
 > > --
 > > View this message in context:
 > > http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/cycle-travel-US-bike-routing-and-unreviewed-rural-TIGER-tp5848084p5848589.html
 > > Sent from the USA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
 > >
 > > _______________________________________________
 > > Talk-us mailing list
 > > Talk-us at openstreetmap.org
 > > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
 > >
 > <div dir="ltr">Richard, I would somewhat caution against penalizing unpaved roads too much. In many areas of the US they actually make wonderful cycling routes, whereas the paved alternatives are high traffic and unpleasant to ride on. Of course, proper smoothness tagging would help but that will be a long way coming. Until then you could consider a user setting to avoid/not avoid unpaved roads.<br><div> Harald.</div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr">On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 2:48 PM Richard Fairhurst <<a href="mailto:richard at systemed.net">richard at systemed.net</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Just as a postscript to this discussion I thought I'd cite an example area.<br>
 > If you look here, in Georgia:<br>
 > <br>
 >    <a href="http://cycle.travel/map?lat=31.9023&lon=-84.0398&zoom=14" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://cycle.travel/map?lat=31.9023&lon=-84.0398&zoom=14</a><br>
 > <br>
 > you'll see that most of the roads are unreviewed TIGER residentials. Of<br>
 > those, these are adjacent to each other:<br>
 > <br>
 > <a href="http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/9359782" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/9359782</a> - good tarmac, should be<br>
 > highway=tertiary<br>
 > <a href="http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/9359913" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/9359913</a> - unpaved road;<br>
 > highway=unclassified, surface=unpaved<br>
 > <a href="http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/9359784" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/9359784</a> - probably tertiary, but lousy<br>
 > geometry at the S<br>
 > <a href="http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/9359783" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/9359783</a> - whoops, where did the<br>
 > connectivity go?<br>
 > <br>
 > All of this is trivially fixable but right now there's no way of using them<br>
 > for routing or sensible cartography. Do dive in - the <a href="http://cycle.travel" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">cycle.travel</a> rendering<br>
 > makes it obvious which bits need fixing, and you learn to identify the roads<br>
 > which are likely to be paved through roads and therefore targets to fix.<br>
 > It's quite good fun. :)<br>
 > <br>
 > cheers<br>
 > Richard<br>
 > <br>
 > <br>
 > <br>
 > <br>
 > <br>
 > --<br>
 > View this message in context: <a href="http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/cycle-travel-US-bike-routing-and-unreviewed-rural-TIGER-tp5848084p5848589.html" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/cycle-travel-US-bike-routing-and-unreviewed-rural-TIGER-tp5848084p5848589.html</a><br>
 > Sent from the USA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.<br>
 > <br>
 > _______________________________________________<br>
 > Talk-us mailing list<br>
 > <a href="mailto:Talk-us at openstreetmap.org" target="_blank">Talk-us at openstreetmap.org</a><br>
 > <a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us</a><br>
 > </blockquote></div>
 > _______________________________________________
 > Talk-us mailing list
 > Talk-us at openstreetmap.org
 > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us



More information about the Talk-us mailing list