[OSM-talk] highway=unsurfaced

[David Murn]

On Tue, 2011-01-11 at 20:39 -0500, Anthony wrote:

> > So, while 'road' may mean a tarred bit of bitumen in the UK, and it
> > means something passable by a vehicle in Australia, in the OSM context
> > it means an unknown classification, temporarily tagged until the
> > required re-survey is complete.
> 
> It means a *road* of unknown classification.  Apparently to some
> people that word "road" means something more than just "a path where
> people drive motor vehicles", and that in order to be a road the path
> has to have some sort of official standing.

You seem to keep getting mixed up between the UK understanding of the
word 'road' and the OSM context of the meaning of highway=road.  As you
can read (quoted) in my original email, highway=road means "unknown
classification".

In Australia for example, there are instances where bicycle paths can be
8' wide asphalt with a clearly defined line painted down the middle,
while a nearby vehicle access road might be barely 6' wide and made of
dirt.  From aerial imagery, both of these should be tagged as
highway=road since the type of way is unknown.

If youre going to re-tag unknown road types, this seems the logical
choice.

> I see no point in mass changing tags.  At best it provides equal
> information.  At worst it provides less information.  And according to
> some it provides wrong information.

The fact is, whether we like it or not, people will mass-change tags.
Lets at least try to encourage them to not break things too badly when
they do so.

> If there were some benefit that might be derived from it, I might
> reconsider.  But I see no benefit, and only potential harm.

Personally, I agree that without a good reason, the tags shouldnt be
changed, but Ive been around OSM long enough to know that just because
common-sense prevails among some on the mailing list, that doesnt
transfer to every user having common-sense in the OSM world.