[OSM-talk] highway=unsurfaced
Ulf Lamping
ulf.lamping at web.de
Mon Oct 1 07:05:46 BST 2007
Steve Chilton schrieb:
> I have added highway=unsurfaced to the Map Features page as it is in use by many mappers, and has been rendered by Osmarender for a while now.
> Rationale that I use is that highway=unsurfaced is used for part of the public highway (therefore subject to rules of road/law, and is by extension traversable by normal road cars) that happens to not have a tarmac surface.
> As against this highway=track is any unsurfaced way that is not part of public highway (eg farm tracks, etc, and not normally traversable by normal road cars).
> To this end I have changed rendering on mapnik layer to unsurfaced as white fill with pecked line casement, and track to brown dashed line.
> At same time I moved cycleway to blue dashed line as the two types of green line symbolisation for bridleways and cycleways were not distinct enough to differentiate easily in my eye.
> PS: I am aware of the recent discussion on the list about unsurfaced roads of a higher status (tertiary, secondary and even primary apparently), but that will have to wait a while as the way mapnik rendering works would need to pick up highway=foo AND key=unsurfaced and THEN have a different style assigned to each highway type, AND change at every width change as it goes through the levels - later maybe!
>
>
Hmmm, this is getting really ugly.
Now we have:
highway=unclassified
highway=unsurfaced
highway=track
trackgrade=gradeX
BTW: Please don't use very specific terms, none english persons like me
don't tend to know what "tarmac surface", "metalled surface" is. If you
are not able to describe a feature in a way that most people do
understand (including none english natives), please don't add stuff to
the map features page.
Unless you are able to explain in the map features page what the exact
differences of the above types are, I tend to simply remove this from
the map features page. We already have enough stuff in that page that
people don't understand how to use - and just adding a new thing is no
real cure.
Don't explain anyhing about this new thing by mail, this will get buried
in the mailing list archive pretty shortly.
Regards, ULFL
P.S: Yes, I'm pretty upset by some people thinking they are better than
others - so they know what to do and don't need to propose any features
first.
More information about the talk
mailing list