[OSM-talk] rural highway tagging: residential or track

[Maarten Deen]

On Mon, 28 Jun 2010 07:08:39 -0400, Stan Berka <stan.berka at gmail.com>
wrote:
> I have frequently a tagging dilemma. See this example: Coburn Rd on this
> location: http://osm.org/go/ZfR@yOeG-- [1] (N of US 2). It was tagged as
> residential, but I've been there two days ago and it's a decent
> "compacted gravel" road, almost 2-car wide primarily for agricultural
> use, although it does connect farms, and probably can be even be used as
> through-road (to get from one highway to another). Category residential
> seemed to me to be primarily for urban setting. So, the best I thought
> for this one would be "track". But this is rendered almost like a path
> (the dashed line). What are your thoughts?

Unclassified with paved=no or surface=gravel?

I was recently exploring Siberia (behind my computer!) and saw some
primary roads where it was obvious from a website (by that mapper) that
these were sand and dirt roads.
So I wouldn't let the surface decide what classification road it is.

I would reserve track for single-lane roads/tracks.

Regards,
Maarten