ADVrider

Go Back   ADVrider > Riding > Layin' down tracks
User Name
Password
Register Inmates Photos Site Rules Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Rating: Thread Rating: 3 votes, 5.00 average. Display Modes
Old 06-17-2012, 04:30 PM   #31
Myway OP
Beastly Adventurer
 
Myway's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2007
Location: Knobby country
Oddometer: 2,554
Quote:
Originally Posted by '[TASF
3: Temporary trails. This is handled in other places on OSM. I would look for how they handle this on regular roads. I for one would not delete the track, but simply tag it as recommended for closed roads. If it's a corporate owned road, tagging it with the proper access flag should be appropriate. Forget which tag it is that says public traffic is currently allowed but can be revoked at any time.
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:construction
Myway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2012, 12:27 AM   #32
FixerDave
KLR650 - XR200R
 
FixerDave's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2006
Location: Victoria, BC, Canada
Oddometer: 373
Quote:
Originally Posted by abhibeckert View Post
...
I can answer that for you: it's completely illegal under civil law in pretty much every country in the world, and also covered by criminal law in some countries (eg: the USA). And it's also illegal under contract law (the contract you agree to before contributing to openstreetmap). And there are ongoing international negotiations to make these laws tougher and better enforced all around the world.

If you didn't create the map yourself, you can't add it to open street map. Simple as that. The only exception is if the company that owns the map data gets you to add it on their behalf.
Sorry, I guess I wasn't clear and you misunderstood. The Canadian government released the "CanVec" dataset for private or commercial use without charge. OSM actually has an agreement with them to use the new version of this data and they are actually providing OSM-format datasets to download for people to work with. Unfortunately, this data doesn't include all the interesting (to me) old logging roads. The Ibycus project used this data to make free Garmin FORMAT maps but the guy did it with the free version of cGPSmapper, which states in its license that the free version can only be used for non-commercial purposes. Also, he happened to do this back when said CanVec data did include the logging roads. I used this old Ibycus dataset and again used cGPSmapper to convert the Ibycus maps BACK to MP format and then on to OSM format such that I could get these roads.

Thus the map data IS entirely legal to use for non-commercial purposes. It is not against the law and I'd have no issues with posting the map data on a public forum under my legal name, What is questionable is if it can meet OSM licensing requirements as this also supports commercial use. There's so much mud here that I doubt any of us could provide a definitive answer. I've actually asked on the OSM forums in the Canadian area but not received any response as of yet. Honestly, I've been to busy to pursue this as I'm neck-deep into making and rendering my own maps.

Sorry for the confusion,

David...
FixerDave is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2012, 01:44 AM   #33
FixerDave
KLR650 - XR200R
 
FixerDave's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2006
Location: Victoria, BC, Canada
Oddometer: 373
Quote:
Originally Posted by [TASF]Overkill View Post
...
. If you get into too many tags though, trying to get too precise for every single case, you will have too many tags and very few roads that are fully covered with all the tags you're looking for.

2: Variability of trails... Definitely, weather can quickly change a trail. We all know this. I simply try to update the rating for trails with the most up to date ride report. No commercial map that I've seen tries to rate trail conditions, and the volatility of the data is the reason for that. I don't want the dirtbike:scale tag to be a requirement to find places to ride, but I want it to be an option

....

4: Hazards. I like the idea of points representing hazards. Would like to see more discussion on this. Generally, I like to accomplish a goal with as few new tags as possible though.

5. Barriers to entry. I think these can simply be covered by tagging the barrier along the path (I do a lot of gates in my area), and tagging the road on the other side appropriately to reflect the new restricted means of travel.

6. Legality of data. I generally only use GPS tracks I've tracked myself or GPS tracks others have provided. Some times I'll use the satellite imagery to trace spots I'm not sure about, but if you can't ride it or walk it in order to map it, what's the point of mapping it beyond what you can see from the road/trail?

7. Track/trail/path. I believe OSM community generally agrees that path is only for non motorized transportation. If you want to designate something as single track, currently you can use the tags for max vehicle width restriction. Remember it's never ok to modify your tags to get a given renderer to render the trail correctly. In OSM the data integrity is far more important than how it renders.
...

I agree that too many options just make rendering maps that much harder. I edited my own set of render-rules for maperitive and spend quite some time making sure I was compressing all the types down to a clean format that suites my application... handlebar mounted Android tablet. Agreed that OSM data should not be perverted to make a map render the way you want, but too much variably is also a problem. Simple is good, and I'd be happier with extra tags, safe to ignore, rather than extra types that must be accounted for.

The "up to date ride report" is what I was trying to get at. When, exactly, was that? How can I write render-rules for it? A tag with a date for the last ride seems useful to me, so long as the date was consistently parse-able. I could see myself doing that with my data and then rendering the "old" ways such that they were a little greyer or something, slowly fading away.

I like the idea of marking hazards but I've noticed those tend to be hard to map. A nasty-difficult section, bad hill, whatever is not exactly the kind of place I want to stop and fiddle with a GPS to make notes. I'm riding through, or I'm busy picking up the bike. JOSM does allow gpx tracks to be rendered in colour that relates to speed, and I really like that. Where my track turns red, I slowed down for some reason. Maybe an extra-hard section, maybe lunch? I flag what I remember - some memories can be vivid Yes, mapping data must reflect the way, but it also has to be somewhat easy to capture.

I scanned the barrier types and basically abandoned them. They are useless for my needs. My private data now includes 3 custom barrier types: token, bypass, or blocked. Each renders to a particular icon that I can easily see while riding. Again, gates change a lot around where I ride, often by the week. I'd like to get it to the point where I could share this with OSM, so I'm open to suggestions, but, again, it has to be something I can render down to the above. I'm not going to make my maps useless to me so that somebody else can know if the gate is a wall or swing-bar or whatever. I can get by it or not, that's what's important. To me, a 10' deep ditch full of barb-wire is the same as a wooden bar with a sign that says "private property, please don't ride here."

Why gather existing data for maps? Planning. I like to make potential routes (again, set to render on my maps - these as orange translucent layers on top of the actual way.) These tend to be private though, as in Google Earth traces or whatever. If I can actually ride them, then the resulting tracks can make it to OSM. My goal is to have many potential routes on my maps; when I ride past one, maybe I'll have time to check it out.

And lastly (sorry for the ramble), I vehemently disagree with the idea that "paths" are to be non-motorized. Around here, that would just result in wiki-wars with ways changing back and forth by the day. Lots and lots of multi-use trails and a hopping-mad biker community being forced out of long-standing riding areas by local governments turning everything without concrete foundations into parks.

Don't even consider making a highway=... based on what 'should' go down it. Them's just fighin' words. Stick to describing what the way is and leave it at that. If there's a legal reason to block motorized vehicles, then add that as another tag. Honestly, I don't care what OSM has standardised on here... like others have said, there are cultural differences to take into account and I'm very positive that 'path' being equal to non-motorized is not going to work in my culture. There is no type you could apply that would satisfy this issue... it's political, not rational. It's either illegal to ride there, or it's not.

Bottom line... I'm falling in love with OSM. The dataset is great, the tools are great, and I'm very, very happy with the maps I'm creating. It is so much better that it used to be. I very much want to return something to OSM and fully intend to convert my wanderings into track data. However, like the barriers, I'm not going to sacrifice usability just to meet a standard. If I can't get out what I need, then I'll do what I want and keep the data private. I expect I'm not the only rider with a gps and a penchant for making custom maps that feels that way. There's probably somebody else out there... right? Hello? Anybody?

David...
FixerDave is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2012, 03:29 AM   #34
ebel
Adventurer
 
Joined: Feb 2011
Location: Ireland, EU
Oddometer: 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by Myway View Post
barrier=tree hazard=yes with acess=? how you can take the obstacle..
Hazard tags are a good idea. "access" tags are for legal access though, not physical access. e.g. a public road you can drive on is access=public. A private driveway that you cannot legally drive on (unless you own it!) but you could *physically* ride on is access=private

Quote:
Originally Posted by [TASF]Overkill View Post
I think it is imperative that the scale be specifically about describing the trail, not attempting to classify what type of rider or bike should be on it.
Definitly

Quote:
Originally Posted by [TASF]Overkill View Post
3: Temporary trails. This is handled in other places on OSM. I would look for how they handle this on regular roads. I for one would not delete the track, but simply tag it as recommended for closed roads
If the road isn't there anymore, then delete it! If the road has changed from a wide dirt road to a narrow road covered in saw dust, just update the road. If half the road is gone, just delete half of it. If it's now private, then mark it as private property. etc.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Myway View Post
Tags must fit each country.

A path, such as walkers in my area tag (single), i can use them if there are no signs.(with motorcycle)
So saying no motorized vehicle allowed. Here you see that wiki goes wrong. Because the writer thinks not worldwide. Or walkers have approved it, not thinking on small others categories like ADV.
Yes, that's a fair point. OSM hasn't really 'solved' this, and it's mostly being ignored. So use the wiki as a guide.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Myway View Post
I tagged them also motorcycle=yes, but some deleted that, because they do not want you there. Although it is correct to be there. So 1:100 walkers.
"motorcycle=yes" means one is legally allowed to ride a bike on it. If that's the law then you were totally right to tag it that way. It's wrong for someone to remove it because they don't want motorcycles there. Tough!

Quote:
Originally Posted by FixerDave View Post
What is questionable is if it can meet OSM licensing requirements as this also supports commercial use.
If someone releases data/maps and says you can use it for anything, but no commerical use, then you cannot use it in OSM. (However I am aware of that CanVec stuff, so that's probably a special case)

Quote:
Originally Posted by FixerDave View Post
I've actually asked on the OSM forums in the Canadian area but not received any response as of yet.
That's a shame. Do you have a link to what you asked? I could poke people and ask for a reply.
ebel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2012, 05:18 AM   #35
Myway OP
Beastly Adventurer
 
Myway's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2007
Location: Knobby country
Oddometer: 2,554
Quote:
Originally Posted by FixerDave View Post
I expect I'm not the only rider with a gps and a penchant for making custom maps that feels that way. David...
There not much, reading the forums, mostly they drive, ask for tracks to ride or do groupriding.
Buy a gps with map, download map. (free) that's it.

I am a mapmaker to but a paper one!! mostly
Mapsource + Garmin Topo + typ file change unpaved track green highway, path brown + file dirtbike waypoints(thousands) with custom ADV symbols (sample magento color is transparant (disappear) in gps) + drawn tracks (which are not a road/track/path on the topo map) = print mapsource A5 laying, glued together as a roadbook and fitted in my A4 roadbookholder. (With left right area overlap)

So i get more area overview then zooming out on my gps.
Also, all the ADV waypoints, i have them as POI in my gps with the same custom symbols.
That i can recognize directly, not looking the same as the branded topmap ones.

Similair to this one but then with my waypoints on top and then the print


You solved the problem: Taken a andorid tablet to the handlebars.
Rugged one? Waterproof? Size? Which? Picture?

Then I have to go digital to.

But i want my own custom symbols on it.

Myway screwed with this post 06-18-2012 at 09:54 AM
Myway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2012, 07:40 AM   #36
[TASF]Overkill
VRSATL
 
[TASF]Overkill's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2009
Location: Lynchburg, VA
Oddometer: 174
Quote:
The "up to date ride report" is what I was trying to get at. When, exactly, was that? How can I write render-rules for it?
I haven't checked, but does OSM have a tag for last-update built in?

Quote:
I like the idea of marking hazards but I've noticed those tend to be hard to map. A nasty-difficult section, bad hill, whatever is not exactly the kind of place I want to stop and fiddle with a GPS to make notes. I'm riding through, or I'm busy picking up the bike.
In my case, I would not crud up a path with a bunch of points to denote steepness / poor condition. I would just tag that section perhaps with the proper grade (steepness) and condition tags (whatever we agree on). The more I've thought about the hazard tag, I think I'd need to hear some examples...

Quote:
I scanned the barrier types and basically abandoned them. They are useless for my needs. My private data now includes 3 custom barrier types: token, bypass, or blocked. Each renders to a particular icon that I can easily see while riding. Again, gates change a lot around where I ride, often by the week.
I think this is like the dirtbike:scale tag and changing tral convention. Conventional maps don't print the status of a gate. They do show that a gate exists, and that it is a certain type of gate. This is for navigational purposes, not necessarily trip planning. I tag barriers with the conventional tags, but I wonder if there shouldn't be an extension to denote the last logged status of the barrier... Damn that's a lot of tags. Maybe a case of gathering too much data for OSMs purposes, and the real thing to do would be a web-app where the community basically just updates these changing parameters as they can, and that data is separate of OSM. Hmmm.

Quote:
And lastly (sorry for the ramble), I vehemently disagree with the idea that "paths" are to be non-motorized. Around here, that would just result in wiki-wars with ways changing back and forth by the day. Lots and lots of multi-use trails and a hopping-mad biker community being forced out of long-standing riding areas by local governments turning everything without concrete foundations into parks.
I think the definition of "path" is that it is not primarily for motor vehicles. However, I definitely see the value in tagging based on whether it is physically a path vs. a track. I just think that's not really consistent with the other labelling. Look at all the paved highway types... Feeders, primary, tertiary, links, etc... These aren't really just descriptions of the physical road, they're indicative of how that bit of road gets used. "Single track" looks like a walking path, but it's a track when used or intended to be used by motorized vehicles... in my opinion. Indeed though, as you said this can be a regional issue. That's why I would be interested in the OSM community determining an international standard... for consistency.

Quote:
I expect I'm not the only rider with a gps and a penchant for making custom maps that feels that way. There's probably somebody else out there... right? Hello? Anybody?
OSM is making me a map geek, and I am loving playing with Mapnik.
[TASF]Overkill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2012, 12:26 PM   #37
FixerDave
KLR650 - XR200R
 
FixerDave's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2006
Location: Victoria, BC, Canada
Oddometer: 373
Quote:
Originally Posted by Myway View Post
...
You solved the problem: Taken a andorid tablet to the handlebars.
Rugged one? Waterproof? Size? Which? Picture?

Then I have to go digital to.

But i want my own custom symbols on it.
Off-topic so I answered here:
http://www.advrider.com/forums/showt...1#post18937801
Yes, custom symbols are not that difficult to do. I do them for my gates.

David...
FixerDave is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2012, 02:01 PM   #38
Myway OP
Beastly Adventurer
 
Myway's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2007
Location: Knobby country
Oddometer: 2,554
I have also my ADV POI database as a kml in Google Earth with the same custom waypointsymbols.

I open this site and log in: http://www.itoworld.com/main product OSMmapper
There i make area's and select what i want to see highway/track etc what changed last period weeks months.

export this to KML and opened in GE over my symbols

and see the red lines track what changed last week.

Myway screwed with this post 06-18-2012 at 02:13 PM
Myway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2012, 10:44 PM   #39
FixerDave
KLR650 - XR200R
 
FixerDave's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2006
Location: Victoria, BC, Canada
Oddometer: 373
Quote:
Originally Posted by [TASF]Overkill View Post
I haven't checked, but does OSM have a tag for last-update built in?
...
The more I've thought about the hazard tag, I think I'd need to hear some examples...
...
Damn that's a lot of tags. Maybe a case of gathering too much data for OSMs purposes
...
Look at all the paved highway types... Feeders, primary, tertiary, links, etc... These aren't really just descriptions of the physical road, they're indicative of how that bit of road gets used.
...
That's why I would be interested in the OSM community determining an international standard... for consistency.
...
I looked at a JOSM xml file and some but not all nodes do seem to have a datestamp. Not the ways though. Not sure how to use it and it's not really a replacement for a deliberate survey date tag. It would be too easy to edit an old way and inadvertently update an auto-timestamp, thus giving a false impression.

On the hazard front, I want to know sections that can be ridden one-way but not the other... Honestly, I'm still thinking about how to do this... trails need a degree of difficulty each way! Just how are you suppose to code and render that? As for the rest, tagging a node here and there with some kind of hazard or barrier info seems the best. People rendering maps can choose to display them or not.

It would seem the open-ended design of OSM makes adding tags for particular groups of end users both possible and easy. The only issue is on the output side... the application using the data needs to render those tags appropriately. In thinking about it, I went the wrong way with my barriers... rather than adding my own barrier= types, which messes the data for everyone (thus I can't share), I should have made a new tag like 'atvobstacle='. Then, in the Maperitive ruleset, I could have then modified the barrier section to look for this other tag and change the symbol. If done right, then any community of OSM users could tag anything they want and just share the appropriate render-rules (in whatever app) to use them, all without compromising the OSM data for others.

With the 'path' thing... remember that local politics is involved. World community standards can't work when that happens. For example, if an area is full of tracks/paths gets OSM mapped as paths, and that means primarily hiking, and that gets brought up at the meeting to decide the new park... well, not so good. Having 2 politicized and polarized groups contesting land-use through OSM would be very ugly and not good for OSM.

David...
FixerDave is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-19-2012, 12:31 AM   #40
FixerDave
KLR650 - XR200R
 
FixerDave's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2006
Location: Victoria, BC, Canada
Oddometer: 373
Quote:
Originally Posted by ebel View Post
...
If someone releases data/maps and says you can use it for anything, but no commerical use, then you cannot use it in OSM. (However I am aware of that CanVec stuff, so that's probably a special case)

That's a shame. Do you have a link to what you asked? I could poke people and ask for a reply.
I asked here: http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=16790
As I said, I've not really pursued this as I've been busy elsewhere.

David...
FixerDave is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-19-2012, 02:45 AM   #41
Myway OP
Beastly Adventurer
 
Myway's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2007
Location: Knobby country
Oddometer: 2,554
Oneway.
is this a hazard?
or a warning is needed.

What you want is: how do I see it and/or how do I hear, the warning.
How to see: oneway, rendered line "track" with arrows on it or a node with a sign (waypoint/signal)
Getting a warning on your bluetooth headset. Those people coming more and more. Just in the outdoor to communicate.
Digital roadbooks/gps with roadbooks signs (Tripy, Twonav, other software) turnsignal/lane assistant.

It is what the render make of it.
And the software can handle.
On the unit people buy most.

hazard=yes???????????? I think not for oneway warning.
motorcycle:backward=no (on note?)

Hazard Warnings and notes.
Like POI, "ping" tankstation.( Poipoint nearby) depends on software.





Two places: where to put.
  • on the note off the line
  • next to the line
What is the best place a road sign on a track or next to trackline.
How do sound/voice warning mostly work in routing programs.
Do you want riding on a route or a track on your gps, other a roadbook.





Two kind off scales on one ADVtrail
  • dirtbike:scale:forward=3
  • dirtbike:scale:backward=2
but how to render, three line at on place bottom line thick left right (see mtbmap lining)


Barrier
barrier=*
see the most used ones
http://tagstat.hypercube.telascience...SC&order=total
(Tip : change the limit (number) in the url and you get longer list.but you can also cahnge the tagname ;-) )

rare values for barrier
http://tagstat.hypercube.telascience...SC&order=total


Fix, categorize and set
example, depends on de rendering program and style possibility
fix tags for simplicity
oneway=true {set oneway=yes}
tunnel=true {set tunnel=yes}
bridge=true {set bridge=yes}

motorvehicle=no {set motor_vehicle=no}


Hazard

hazard=*
http://tagstat.hypercube.telascience...SC&order=total

Myway screwed with this post 06-19-2012 at 03:43 AM
Myway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-19-2012, 10:27 PM   #42
FixerDave
KLR650 - XR200R
 
FixerDave's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2006
Location: Victoria, BC, Canada
Oddometer: 373
Quote:
Originally Posted by Myway View Post
...
How to see: oneway, rendered line "track" with arrows on it or a node with a sign (waypoint/signal)
...
Two kind off scales on one ADVtrail
  • dirtbike:scale:forward=3
  • dirtbike:scale:backward=2
but how to render, three line at on place bottom line thick left right (see mtbmap lining)
..
Barrier
barrier=*
see the most used ones
http://tagstat.hypercube.telascience...SC&order=total
(Tip : change the limit (number) in the url and you get longer list.but you can also cahnge the tagname ;-) )
...
Fix, categorize and set
example, depends on de rendering program and style possibility
fix tags for simplicity
oneway=true {set oneway=yes}
tunnel=true {set tunnel=yes}
bridge=true {set bridge=yes}

motorvehicle=no {set motor_vehicle=no}


Hazard

hazard=*
http://tagstat.hypercube.telascience...SC&order=total

"Hazard=Pub consumes half of the cycleway in summer"

That's a good one and here I am worried about polluting shared OSM data with my tags. Oh, and Hazard=Police is a great one too.

But, OSM is suppose to be for everyone. Sure, I can mark my own ways as one-way for me and they render down with arrows just fine. That's great for me, but while I can take my KLR places many would never dream of, I know people with riding abilities that put me to shame. They would not be limited to one-way in these sections... and they'd laugh at what I'd call a hazard. Thus, how can we, as a group, create OSM data that is both share-able with everyone and also useful to us.

In thinking about it, trail sections that would be considered much harder one way than another (like my hill that left me skittering backwards, front wheel locked and the engine turning over backwards in 1st gear) can be treated as overlapping ways, one in each direction. Just in the offending piece, mind you. Then, each section could get the difficulty scale attached. Routing software, if it were modified to include this information, would see a bit of trail in the direction of travel that was past what the rider set as the limit and not use it. Rendering, on the other hand, I'm still not clear on. Maybe when I render the maps, I can check the difficulty of each way and just not include ones over a certain rating. The result would leave the section in question with that part only showing arrows in one direction, the direction I can handle. Like I said, I'm still not clear on this.

Personally, I'm not interested in routing software - I just mark/render my established routes as a translucent blue overlay, potential routes in orange. They're just part of the maps I'm making. However, some people like taking directions from a computer, so shared data needs to support this somehow.

As for the barriers... Yes, there are many, many types but they still don't provide any information about how effective they are. A steel gate may be a steel gate, but I can ride around most of them, but not all. That last bit is what I'm interested in. Thus, I think 2 tags are in order. One to specify the type (barrier) and another to specify effectiveness. Then again, a gate I consider a bypass (there is a way around) might not be the same for some riders or vehicles. Again, what I'm doing works great for me but isn't something I can upload to OSM. Not quite as bad as saying a pub is a hazard, but still... If the intent of this thread is to come up with a workable standard, well, my personal one isn't it.

I suspect the same scale used on trail difficulty could be applied to barriers as well. In fact, the entire hazard thing could use the same scale. highway=whatever, with another tag that says difficulty, barrier=whatever, with another tag that says difficulty, hazard=whatever, with another tag that says difficulty. We just need a scale that makes sense and our very own tag name to record it. All the rest is just a rendering problem.

David...
FixerDave is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-20-2012, 12:14 AM   #43
FixerDave
KLR650 - XR200R
 
FixerDave's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2006
Location: Victoria, BC, Canada
Oddometer: 373
dirtbike:scale

Having now spent way too long reading OSM wiki pages on mtb:scale and the proposed dirtbike:scale, etc., I've decided to have a go at making some Maperitive render-rules that work with dirtbike:scale. If I can get my maps to display info in a way that's useful to me then I'll adopt that standard.

The whole hazard thing is basically the same as the mtb "Crux spots or very difficult single places," which seems fine as a system to me as well. Generic hazards can be tagged as such, but an additional dirtbike:scale tag on a node adds a lot of meaning for us.

If we also adopted the mtb : scale : uphill (had to add spaces there, got a random smiley) key and standardize on having ways always go down hill as well then the rendering software could identify nasty points and mark them as one-way (down). Actually, we could do this one better and say "oneway" instead of uphill. Then, the way direction could denote the easy way (which may or may not actually be downhill) and the render software can figure it out accordingly. Still need to think about this... probably won't make sense until I actually try to render it.

I would also propose extending it a bit with something like dirtbike:scale:barrier to deal with that issue.

I would also propose using the "survey_date" tag as well, and that about covers it. Most everything necessary already exists... it's just a matter of seeing how it can be used effectively.

David...
FixerDave is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-20-2012, 07:15 AM   #44
[TASF]Overkill
VRSATL
 
[TASF]Overkill's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2009
Location: Lynchburg, VA
Oddometer: 174
Dave, sounds like you've stumbled on some good tags... I'll take a look and comment in a few days!

I'm confused about this uphill/downhill business... A trail that has giant ruts and loose rocks going uphill also has them coming downhill (unless it's two separate trails). If the scale is about trail condition and not specifically difficulty, why have separate "scales" for up vs. down hill? You can include the steepness of the trail in the tagging (there is a tag specifically for this) or in topo map data you overlay your map onto. It should be easy for a person to combine the trail conditions scale as it related to dirtbikes and single tracked vehicles with the trail steepness and determine that they'd rather go up it than down in it. Right?
[TASF]Overkill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-20-2012, 07:33 PM   #45
FixerDave
KLR650 - XR200R
 
FixerDave's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2006
Location: Victoria, BC, Canada
Oddometer: 373
Quote:
Originally Posted by [TASF]Overkill View Post
...
I'm confused about this uphill/downhill business...
...
Well, a hill is just an example, but there are places I find easier/possible to ride in one direction over the other and I want my maps to show this. All it takes is a short vertical section or some tree/root/hole combo in the wrong place. My maps will show this in a clear way (currently, one-way arrows) but the point of discussing it is to make this information OSM shareable. And, really, if you go by the dirtbike:scale thing, there are clearly sections that "require momentum to ride through" in one direction but not the other. I mean, if the hole by the tree is behind the root you're riding over, then it's just a bump; if the hole is in front of the root that's angled towards the tree then there's some serious skill involved to clear it. The question is how to show this on a map.

I agree that 'uphill' really isn't relevant to dirtbiking like is to pedal bikes, for obvious reasons. Thus, I suggested 'oneway' instead.' I'm still not clear on how to show it though... once I get a handle on that then maybe how to code the info in OSM will be more obvious. Currently, I'm thinking along the lines of having chevrons along-side or even over-top the trail. They would point in the easier direction and somehow indicate how serious this one-way suggestion is, maybe thicker or in multiples. Done that way, they could be node data rather than part of the way. Of course, that brings up routing issues, sigh. Making something that works for everyone is a lot harder than stuff for yourself.

David...

FixerDave screwed with this post 06-20-2012 at 08:26 PM
FixerDave is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Share

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

.
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


Times are GMT -7.   It's 12:21 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ADVrider 2011-2014