[Talk-us] Usage of highway=track in the United States

[Mateusz Konieczny]

Feb 24, 2021, 17:39 by kevin.b.kenny at gmail.com:

> Perhaps the issue among that list that troubles me the most is the difficulty of choosing `highway=*` for the two tire tracks that disappear out of sight into the woods. I've mentioned that before, on this mailing list and on "tagging", and the consensus of the replies appears to have been that if I don't know the ultimate purpose for that poor road, I shouldn't map it at all!
>
This people were apparently uninformed and unaware about:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Droad
"This tag is used for a road/way/path/street/alley/motorway/etc. with an unknown classification"
highway=road with surface tag is perfectly fine tagging if exact highway value is unclear

And about 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:fixme
"The fixme key allows contributors to mark objects and places that need further attention."
highway=track
fixme=is it just forestry road or is it leading to some village/hamlet
is perfectly fine.

You may also use https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Notes
but main issue here is someone looking at road geometry may miss it

>  That strikes me as a ridiculous extreme. I know the surface, smoothness, tracktype, and so on of the portion that I've explored. I know that it's useful to hikers, cyclists, equestrians, snowmobilists, whatever, along the portion I've traveled. I know its alignment. But I can't map it because I don't know why it was put there?  Really?  `highway=track` at least asserts that the road is there, and I argue that it's a perfectly fine placeholder until and unless there's better information. (And I don't personally consider collecting that information to be a particularly urgent task - the distinction is not likely to affect anyone's life in the slightest.)
>
Note that https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Droad is a standard placeholder.
 

> This is a more general pet peeve of mine. If a tagging scheme requires me to do research beyond the characteristics that I can observe in the field on a mapping trip, that's a bad tagging scheme. 
>
+1


> I do try to make it a practice to tag surface, tracktype, smoothness and sac_scale when I'm mapping a track, path, or footway.
>
Thanks!

> I have yet to see a convincing reply to the question: "What would a data consumer want to know, that would be informed by the distinction among 'track', 'residential', 'service' and possibly even 'unclassified' as applied to relatively unimproved rural roads?"
>
Note: not from USA. Not sure whatever anything mentioned below would apply.

Main use in Poland would be: 

(1) one can more easily distinguish road network structure while viewing map
So while looking at https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=16/49.1649/22.4344
you have no need to scroll map to discover that it is end of main road network,
further roads - even asphalt ones - are forestry tracks

(2) prefer to avoid car routing over highway=track (even surface=asphalt tracktype=grade1 ones)
as they are far more likely to have access restrictions (including temporary ones
and not yet mapped ones), heavy machinery - forestry and agricultural one, 
temporarily worsened road quality (piles of mud left by heavy machinery),
obstructions like wood storage along road or on road itself, tourists,
roads of geometry unsuitable for standard car traffic, steep slopes more
likely etc

(3) prefer highway=track over other roads for bicycle and tourist routing as there may
be occasional heavy machinery but it is far better than many cars

Is anything like that applying in USA?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/attachments/20210225/f7173336/attachment-0001.htm>