[OSM-talk] Rendering of tracktype

[Frank Sautter]

Nick Whitelegg wrote:
>>> i agree with you! my idea of how this should be rendered is: 
>>> grade1: just like highway=service [...]
> 
>> It's worth noting that tracktype is not a universally welcome tag -
>> a lot of people think having an arbitrary scale isn't very
>> "OSM-like", and that it's better to tag specific characteristics.
>> We don't necessarily have anything better, of course.
> 
> There is the optional surface=gravel tag to indicate a gravel surface
> for a track. A related tag for paths, rather than tracks, is
> width=narrow.

i don't think, that our tracktype scheme is arbitrary at least for 
tracks here in germany. i think the 5 different grades match the 
condition of a track very good.

grade 1: more or less the same as a service road (the same construction) 
but through farmland or forest. surface is asphalt or concrete. 2 
vehicles can pass each other by using the gaveled shoulder.

grade 2: track has a surface made of gravel, shoulder is often overgrown 
by grass.

grade 3: track has a surface made of gravel, but the area between the 
middle of the way is overgrown with grass.

grade 4: tracks consist mainly out of two tire marks, sometimes there 
are muddy puddles. bumpy.

grade 5: rarely used tracks. often completely overgrown, but it is 
cleary distinguishable from the surrounding area.

the only thing that sometimes is difficult, is to set the point when a 
track reaches another grade (tracks are often getting worse, the more 
distant they become from a major road)

tracks are always drivable by 4-wheeled vehicles, as paths are not.

frank