OSM Openstreetmap tagging ADV tracks.

[Myway]

Drive direction==============>
rendering the line, two lines on the same place, smallest on top
OSM, split the track line, tag that part that is difficult, watch the trackline drawing direction.
Tag could be scaled or something else.

------------------------------------------------>

--------------------/--------------------------->

the other way around it look like

------------------\--------------------------->

more difficulty
-----------------\\-------------------------->

a serie of difficulties

------------------\------------//----------->


Surface:
Look at surface.
Common names, people tag easier faster common names.
But look at track, mostly only track, not much more tags.
Take gravel and see the picture. rocks
There is fine-gravel
Must there be more gravel:scale

Is it that, tag what you see and do not make dirtbike:scale.

Most tags are made from a street kind of view use or a landscape view.
They never think of dirtbike use. So bad is for me easy.
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/P...surface_values
smoothness=catastrophic only 4wd


The biggest problem is:
How to get ADV riders tag in OSM.!!!!!!!

We learned from Allroadmap. Much have downloaded the Garmin version in Mapsource. Free map and link from forums.
People adv riders looked and said it is not up to date in my area. The ones that react on the forum. Others say if we make that public it become to crowded and closed. The advantage of a correct map is that each can choose it's own way. So less crowds are divided over the area's. Track database, give more people on that trail.

There is a button on the website to give incorrect points, but i think all have the mapsource version and never come on the website.
A few gave incorrect points, so I could tag them correctly, but the problem is i never saw it, so many questions about one point. Controler must tag themselve. There must be a good ADV manual how to tag easy and fast. Also the special tags for ADV.

So, do people want to invest time in tagging, or is it ADV mapping party/ride a solution locally.

Most of what we talk here goes above the head of lot of people.
A few must make the environment to use easy maps so ADV riders can use and good information and options to tag for ADV riders use. Around the world.

(hope all can understand what i mean, writing is not my daily job in this foreign language)

[Myway]

from this page some rider talk software.
http://advrider.com/forums/showthrea...684282&page=35

[kbroderick]

So, for those of you who have been playing with the OSM data and Garmin maps...can anyone tell me why my GPS wanted to route me over Mt. Washington, N.H., via hiking trails last month?

I'm not sure if it's the lack of a permissible: tag on the paths to rule out motorcycles or if it was the settings on my GPS, but it was a rather inconvenient suggestion. I'd like to have some idea of where the issue lies, but I can't figure out if it's my GPS settings, the OSM map data, or the translation of the OSM map data to the Garmin format.

Edit: in particular, my GPS first wanted to route me past the end of Base Station Rd. up the Mount Washington Cog Railway then tried to send me up the Jewell Trail. I'm sure both options would have made for interesting ride reports, but I'm guessing the USFS types would've taken a dim view of the idea...

[Myway]

Originally Posted by kbroderick

So, for those of you who...

Which OSM data map have you installed?
On which gps?
Have you installed the OSM datamap also in Mapsource?
If so you can try it out in mapsource. routing.

Jewell trail
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=44...om=15&layers=M
take second tab editing then last map info editing
and there you can search for yousef what tags are on.
Jewell trail
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/118667346
Jewell trail say nothing about motorcycle or motorvehicle, it is a path.
foot=designated
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/T...s%3Ddesignated

and the other trails in that area have it to.
foot=designated
or
highway=footway (footway is always rendered as no for motor_vehicle)

So basicly there is no tag that say anything about motorcycle or its group.
And basicly the path must be mentioned in de linestyle to see it in the OSMdatatmap for garmin.

If the renderer have not rendered it so, that it is not allowed for motorcycle( or motor_vehicle) because the foot= designated or just rendered path is allowed. Then routing goes over it.

example line style for mkgmap:
highway=path [0x08 road_class=0 road_speed=7 resolution 24]

Then routing program let you drive over that path.
So highway path must be a part of the linestyle.

I think the line style for mkgmap could need some adjustment.
If this is placed in the first lines of the style.
highway=path & foot=designated {add motor_vehicle = no}

Thenpath with these combinations, you can never route about it with a motorcycle.

we have to see the linestyle for that OSMdatamap to see if that is different.

	foot = designated highway = path name = Jewell Trail sac_scale = mountain_hiking

[kbroderick]

Originally Posted by Myway

Which OSM data map have you installed?
On which gps?
Have you installed the OSM datamap also in Mapsource?
If so you can try it out in mapsource. routing.

I'm using a Montana 650, maps are also installed in Basecamp.

With routing set to shortest distance, I did also see the same routing behavior in Basecamp. Shortest time goes around.

The OSM data map was downloaded from garmin.openstreetmap.nl, back on January 29.

Originally Posted by Myway

Jewell trail
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=44...om=15&layers=M
take second tab editing then last map info editing
and there you can search for yousef what tags are on.
Jewell trail
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/118667346
Jewell trail say nothing about motorcycle or motorvehicle, it is a path.
foot=designated
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/T...s%3Ddesignated

and the other trails in that area have it to.
foot=designated
or
highway=footway (footway is always rendered as no for motor_vehicle)

So basicly there is no tag that say anything about motorcycle or its group.
And basicly the path must be mentioned in de linestyle to see it in the OSMdatatmap for garmin.

If the renderer have not rendered it so, that it is not allowed for motorcycle( or motor_vehicle) because the foot= designated or just rendered path is allowed. Then routing goes over it.

example line style for mkgmap:
highway=path [0x08 road_class=0 road_speed=7 resolution 24]

Then routing program let you drive over that path.
So highway path must be a part of the linestyle.

I think the line style for mkgmap could need some adjustment.
If this is placed in the first lines of the style.
highway=path & foot=designated {add motor_vehicle = no}

Thenpath with these combinations, you can never route about it with a motorcycle.

we have to see the linestyle for that OSMdatamap to see if that is different.

OK, this is where I'm getting a little confused. Does the foot= attribute imply access=no for all other forms of travel? (which is almost accurate in this case; skiing would also be technically allowed, I think, although not advisable)

If so, is it in the conversion to Garmin format that the data is getting misconstrued or in the way I have avoidances set on my GPS?

[Myway]

http://garmin.openstreetmap.nl/

This map other area i have on my PC and gps too.
It is called OSM world routable.
A dutch guy called Lambertus make them, he render the linestyle.

this is the forum topic for questions
http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=2625

montana, with up to date software?

Do you have the routing settings set on car/motorcycle or motorcycle in the montana?

Since basecamp last editions it is possible to switch between car and motorcycle, this is in mapsource one category.
You get a diffrerence when you route in mapsource and bascamp?
Garmin have changed in these programs probebly to other routing methodes, because montana is quit new i think in this device they have also different routingmethods.

Mkgmap is a translation program from osm data to garmin codes, if garmin change the codestyle, mkgmap can not do his work right and have to be rewritten if possible, we must know then garmin code and what they mean. routing.
Or routing program do this just a bit different.
There are so many fixed updates for the montana. And that after so may years off knowhow.

I think there lies the problem.

My next gps is not a Garmin!!!!!!!!


ticket is made

[Myway]

this is where I'm getting a little confused. Does the foot= attribute imply access=no for all other forms of travel?

No, it only say something about foot. (in general)
But you know the local behaviour by a sign at the beginning of that trail/area and local rules.
If the local rule is: only by a sign of transport, (now with a walker) you may use the trail, and there is no sign with a motorcycle on it. So motorcyclist are not allowed. Than because of local rule we can (suppose) say only the tag foot= designated means indirect motorcyle=no. but that is (assuming) we must know exactly the signs in that place.

This could be total different in other parts of world.
So problem for translationstyle ( general for the whole world) you write this line in it or not.
highway=path & foot=designated {add motor_vehicle = no}


Probebly, a local OSM walker tagged it, local means, localy taged by local rules only the walking part.
That we see often, not tagging for other forms of transport.
So we motorcyclist must add most of the time extra tags.

But maybe foot=designated and the rules in that area say somthing about motrocyling as a transport.

(which is almost accurate in this case; skiing would also be technically allowed, I think, although not advisable)

if than skiing=designated. (local rules) what signs at the beginning of trail and area. Set by a skier. ;-)

If so, is it in the conversion to Garmin format that the data is getting misconstrued or in the way I have avoidances set on my GPS?

i answered this above, map in montana versus routing montana.


I can not see any signs at the beginning of the jewell trail

Because of national forest sign on that roadthe rules are different?

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CFR-200...nt-detail.html

[FixerDave]

Originally Posted by Myway

Drive direction==============>
rendering the line, two lines on the same place, smallest on top
OSM, split the track line, tag that part that is difficult, watch the trackline drawing direction.
Tag could be scaled or something else.
...

Surface:
Look at surface.
Common names, people tag easier faster common names.
But look at track, mostly only track, not much more tags.
Take gravel and see the picture. rocks
There is fine-gravel
Must there be more gravel:scale

Is it that, tag what you see and do not make dirtbike:scale.
...
The biggest problem is:
How to get ADV riders tag in OSM.!!!!!!!
...
Most of what we talk here goes above the head of lot of people.
...
(hope all can understand what i mean, writing is not my daily job in this foreign language)

With direction, yes, that's what I was thinking... either split to a 2-node way in each direction at the difficult point and show chevrons (-->--, -->>--, -->>>--) in the easy direction or just tag single nodes, aka barriers, that somehow have a direction. I'm not sure how to get direction from a single node though, or if it's even possible... This stuff is pretty new to me. There's also the issue of how to get this to render down to those using Garmin format stuff, etc..

As for 'surface', are you suggesting this instead of dirtbike:scale? Just extend it for our purposes? If so, I do see one issue... some non-biker may be inclined to change it to something more accurate (ie: it's 'sand', not 'loose-rutted', or whatever) and we'd lose important information. Non-bikers would be a lot less inclined to change dirtbike:scale. The flip-side is that we don't get non-bikers editing dirtbike:scale and we lose potential information there. I guess it goes both ways... something to ponder for a while.

As for getting ADriders tagging... it's just a matter of time. Garmin has been around for a long time and is still the standard, just because people stick with what they know. OSM has gone from nothing to incredible in a very short period of time. Between governments releasing their data to OSM for free (ie: CanVec) and the whole crowd-source thing, OSM data will completely dominate mapping, and fairly soon at that. It's inevitable. Already, with OSM, the old CanVec data, and my own mapping efforts, I, as in ME, a single person with a few hours to kill, likely has the most complete maps of Southern Vancouver Island in existence. If not me then someone like me. Think about that. I have better maps (the most data and the most up to date) than anything available from Google, Garmin, Bing... anyone. Me, an individual. That is the power of OSM. Today, only a few (as in a few hundred thousand) mapping geeks get this. The tools are still challenging to use. But, custom mapping has already gone from cartography professionals to basic geeks. Soon, it will be as easy as making an Excel chart (or, better yet, a Libre Office Calc chart ). Soon, everyone will be adding data. There are already systems out there that automatically collect and utilize member GPS data. It will happen. Garmin will be using OSM data soon. Everyone will. They may not even know it, but they will.

Oh, and sorry for writing so much. I expect native-English readers glaze over when looking at the length of my posts. Can't help myself. It must be very hard for the non-English members.

David...

[Myway]

Originally Posted by Myway

I think there lies the problem.

My next gps is not a Garmin!!!!!!!!


ticket is made

the reaction of a other member on that forum.

In the default mkgmap settings paths are already blocked for motor vehicles:
highway=footway|highway=path|highway=steps {add access = no; add foot = yes}
The problem is that the newer Garmin units with the latest firmware (and Basecamp v 3.3) don't observe the access = no mkgmap settings anymore.
A workaround is to select the avoidance of carpool lanes, this will block all roads with access = no (but unfortunately, even if they have motorcycle=yes )

Here a short explanation of making a Garmin Map.
another one

[Myway]

This is intresting Montana and maps

Originally Posted by osm world routable topic/forum

I've noticed that problem on my Garmin Montana (and Basecamp) as well, got routed over a hiking trail in automobile mode. I presume this is simply a bug, because it's happening on their official topo maps, too. Oddly, in one situation where there's both a road and a trail going from one destination to another, if I select Automotive, it routes me along the trail, while if I select Hiking, it routes me along the road. This happens exactly the same whether it's Garmin's map or Lambertus'.

[abhibeckert]

Originally Posted by FixerDave

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.

I haven't read this "CanVec" agreement, but it probably doesn't apply to you. Don't add the data to OSM until after you've read it.

Originally Posted by FixerDave

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.

As you mention a few sentences later, OSM is far from "non-commercial". Anything added to OSM is allowed to be used by commercial entities, and there are companies/businesses around the world who've built their entire business model around it. If they are not allowed to use the data, then you are not allowed to put it on the map.

Originally Posted by FixerDave

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,

Yep, because typically when you post data under your name, you are not giving anyone permission to do anything with that data, except look at it. So you're all good.

This applies to posting stuff on AdvRider, but it doesn't apply to OSM. When you contribute to OSM you are releasing that data under the OSM license.

Originally Posted by FixerDave

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,

No confusion, I understand where you're coming from. And I've also done the leg-work for you (I'm not a lawyer, but I have been working with copyright licensing almost daily for my entire adult life).

Unless you have written permission from whoever holds the copyright on the map data, you cannot add it to OSM and doing so will cause a massive headache at best, and full on nasty legal action at worst.

It might take five years for someone to notice that you did it, but that will only make it more difficult to solve. This is serious, when someone gets it wrong (and it happens regularly) somebody has to do in and delete entire sections of the map, and there's even a remote possibility of civil and/or criminal lawsuits.

As I said before, anything on OSM is allowed to be used by anyone in the world for (almost) any purpose. You are not allowed to publish other people's data under those terms - only they can do that.

Originally Posted by ebel

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)

Also, I'd be suspicious of anyone who says "you can use it for anything". Because any good lawyer will tell you there is no such thing.

In most countries, if you put that language in a contract it will render the entire contract invalid - reverting you back to where you were if the contract never existed (plus the added complication of false promises).

[abhibeckert]

Originally Posted by Myway

Drive direction==============>
rendering the line, two lines on the same place, smallest on top
OSM, split the track line, tag that part that is difficult, watch the trackline drawing direction.
Tag could be scaled or something else.

------------------------------------------------>

--------------------/--------------------------->

the other way around it look like

------------------\--------------------------->

more difficulty
-----------------\\-------------------------->

a serie of difficulties

------------------\------------//----------->

The software I've worked with renders two-way roads without any symbol at all, and puts arrows in the direction of travel if only one direction is allowed. Some barriers, like gates and bridges, have a nice icon... but most just turn up as a grey dot if they're visible at all.

Originally Posted by Myway

Surface:
Look at surface.
Common names, people tag easier faster common names.
But look at track, mostly only track, not much more tags.
Take gravel and see the picture. rocks
There is fine-gravel
Must there be more gravel:scale

Is it that, tag what you see and do not make dirtbike:scale.

Most tags are made from a street kind of view use or a landscape view.
They never think of dirtbike use. So bad is for me easy.
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/P...surface_values
smoothness=catastrophic only 4wd

I think you're over-complicating it. Here's how I do it:

* is it a really good quality surface like asphalt, concrete or cobblestones? Don't apply any tags (example)
* for anything else, add surface=unpaved (example)
* is it narrow enough to make passing difficult for two cars? tag it as highway=track (example)
* so narrow even two motorbikes would have trouble passing each other? then highway=path (example)
* would you feel more comfortable if your 4WD has a winch, just incase? 4wd_only=recommended (example)
* has it got creek crossings deep enough to put water over the windscreen? do you need a winch to get up the hill? do you tell the kids to get out and walk down the hill because you might roll over? tag it as 4wd_only=yes (example)

Since weather can radically change the conditions from one week to the next, and almost nobody is downloading the latest OSM data every day (let alone contributing that quick), I think it's a complete waste of time to get more specific than that. If you need that much detail, you can't get it from a map. You need to get it from someone who's been down there recently, perhaps they posted a ride report on ADV.

[kbroderick]

Originally Posted by abhibeckert

* so narrow even two motorbikes would have trouble passing each other? then highway=path (example)
* would you feel more comfortable if your 4WD has a winch, just incase? 4wd_only=recommended (example)
* has it got creek crossings deep enough to put water over the windscreen? do you need a winch to get up the hill? do you tell the kids to get out and walk down the hill because you might roll over? tag it as 4wd_only=yes (example)

Based on the discussion about routing and motorcycles, it appears that the general consensus is that highway=path implies access=no, foot=yes, i.e. no motor vehicles, so perhaps highway=path isn't the best option?

I can see it being pretty easy to confuse matters, particularly in a state like Vermont where there are unsigned, legal-for-motor vehicles "roads" that are single track (or less), but where anything not a public right-of-way is prohibited unless you have written permission from the landowner (thus no need, at least legally, to sign "no motor vehicles" to keep motos out).

[abhibeckert]

Originally Posted by kbroderick

Based on the discussion about routing and motorcycles, it appears that the general consensus is that highway=path implies access=no, foot=yes, i.e. no motor vehicles, so perhaps highway=path isn't the best option?

Some of the places I ride definitely are not suitable for highway=track.



But they can be long enough to get lost and starved to death if a helicopter search team doesn't find you, so it's certainly important to have these trails on the map.

The official description for highway=path includes "snowmobile trails, ski trails, hiking trails, horse trails, bike trails and paths, mountain bike trails as well as combinations of the above and other modes of transportation."

The nice thing about avoiding specific tags, is if something is a bit borderline... then it doesn't really matter which way it is tagged.

[[TASF]Overkill]

-Highway=Path - I agree now... There is definitely a use for "path" in motorized use. I'm thinking it may be as simple as whether it was designed for / capable for use by 4 wheeled vehicles. An ATV trail is probably still a track, but true single track comes down to a path.

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/T...Dpath/Examples

I'l re-read the thread with my eyes open to PATH... Still not 100% sure how to cover all scenarios though. Gonna be some judgment call involved I'm sure...