When is a Road a Track

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
11 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

When is a Road a Track

Warren
I have asked this question before but did not really get a clear answer.

I am working off the Western Australian Main Roads data checking against
the OSM road attributes.  Occasionally I come across lines that are
classed in OSM as highway:unclassified or highway:residential that do
not appear on the Main Roads data base.

I would argue that these are named tracks rather than roads but I wanted
to check others opinion.

Do I leave them alone or change the classification to highway:track?


_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: When is a Road a Track

Ben Kelley-4
Generally if it's graded I would put highway=unclassified.

 - Ben.

On 10 February 2017 at 10:51, Warren <[hidden email]> wrote:
I have asked this question before but did not really get a clear answer.

I am working off the Western Australian Main Roads data checking against the OSM road attributes.  Occasionally I come across lines that are classed in OSM as highway:unclassified or highway:residential that do not appear on the Main Roads data base.

I would argue that these are named tracks rather than roads but I wanted to check others opinion.

Do I leave them alone or change the classification to highway:track?




_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: When is a Road a Track

Warin
Does the Main roads Department show residential roads?
If not then I would also assume that the unclassified roads would not necessarily be displayed either.

On their website .. https://www.mainroads.wa.gov.au/OurRoads/Facts/Pages/StateRoadNetworkMaps.aspx

they say
"In the future, this may also be extended to include Department of Environment and Conservation roads."
"

Public roads not part of the State Road Network are generally local roads managed by Local Government or minor roads managed by other State Government agencies, such as national park roads managed by the Department of Environment and Conservation.  "

So I would not be confident that they show all the roads.

If you want to get more information on the individual roads then you should try contacting the original mapper.


On 10-Feb-17 11:04 AM, Ben Kelley wrote:
Generally if it's graded I would put highway=unclassified.

 - Ben.

On 10 February 2017 at 10:51, Warren <[hidden email]> wrote:
I have asked this question before but did not really get a clear answer.

I am working off the Western Australian Main Roads data checking against the OSM road attributes.  Occasionally I come across lines that are classed in OSM as highway:unclassified or highway:residential that do not appear on the Main Roads data base.

I would argue that these are named tracks rather than roads but I wanted to check others opinion.

Do I leave them alone or change the classification to highway:track?





_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au



_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: When is a Road a Track

Eon4wd
In reply to this post by Warren
Hi Warren,
Tracks are of particular interest to me.
As a 4wder, I plan my travels according to the tracks and the 'grade' of the track in an area, thus getting them right is important to me.
If highway = Track is used it really needs the additional 'grade' tags
The Aust tagging guidelines is a good system see  
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines
Tracks need to be driven before they can be correctly described.
Armchair mapping has its place to identify that something maybe there, but the rest of the tags need to be correct as it dictates what type of 4wd is required to negotiate the track.
Is it possible to tag that the grade is 'unknown' ? which is more helpful to me than nothing or an incorrect guess.
Thanks
Ian


-----Original Message-----
From: Warren [mailto:[hidden email]]
Sent: Friday, 10 February 2017 10:52 AM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: [talk-au] When is a Road a Track

I have asked this question before but did not really get a clear answer.

I am working off the Western Australian Main Roads data checking against the OSM road attributes.  Occasionally I come across lines that are classed in OSM as highway:unclassified or highway:residential that do not appear on the Main Roads data base.

I would argue that these are named tracks rather than roads but I wanted to check others opinion.

Do I leave them alone or change the classification to highway:track?


_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au


_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: When is a Road a Track

Warren
I agree Eon4wd, my interest in OSM originated from my interest in
bushwalking.  Often we can make an educated guess of tracktype from an
aerial image and knowledge of the general area.  I suggest that if it is
not clear you leave out the tracktype field, this implies unknown.

My point was really:

Do we accept the Main Roads Western Australia data as a list of
officially recognised Roads ( highway = primary, residential, etc not =
track or = path)?

I accept the point that highway = unclassified could be appropriate for
a road that does not appear on the data base.


On 10/02/2017 12:13 PM, Eon4wd wrote:

> Hi Warren,
> Tracks are of particular interest to me.
> As a 4wder, I plan my travels according to the tracks and the 'grade' of the track in an area, thus getting them right is important to me.
> If highway = Track is used it really needs the additional 'grade' tags
> The Aust tagging guidelines is a good system see
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines
> Tracks need to be driven before they can be correctly described.
> Armchair mapping has its place to identify that something maybe there, but the rest of the tags need to be correct as it dictates what type of 4wd is required to negotiate the track.
> Is it possible to tag that the grade is 'unknown' ? which is more helpful to me than nothing or an incorrect guess.
> Thanks
> Ian
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Warren [mailto:[hidden email]]
> Sent: Friday, 10 February 2017 10:52 AM
> To: [hidden email]
> Subject: [talk-au] When is a Road a Track
>
> I have asked this question before but did not really get a clear answer.
>
> I am working off the Western Australian Main Roads data checking against the OSM road attributes.  Occasionally I come across lines that are classed in OSM as highway:unclassified or highway:residential that do not appear on the Main Roads data base.
>
> I would argue that these are named tracks rather than roads but I wanted to check others opinion.
>
> Do I leave them alone or change the classification to highway:track?
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-au mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>
>


_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: When is a Road a Track

Andrew Harvey-3
On 10 February 2017 at 16:33, Warren <[hidden email]> wrote:
Do we accept the Main Roads Western Australia data as a list of officially recognised Roads ( highway = primary, residential, etc not = track or = path)?

I accept the point that highway = unclassified could be appropriate for a road that does not appear on the data base.

I don't think it should be a hard rule that you must follow what the Main Roads data says (if someone wanted authoritive data they would use it directly) because they can be exceptions to this where on the ground doesn't match up with that particular dataset.

That said, determining if it should be highway=unclassified or highway=track isn't easy. I think it's more important to have other tags like surface, track_type, etc than the correct highway tag (you can use track_type on highway=unclassified).

_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: When is a Road a Track

David Bannon-2
In reply to this post by Warren

Do you mean without seeing them yourself Warren ?  I personally think
that you should only correct another mapper's work if you have
personally seen something that needs correction. I am sure there are
some exceptions. But here, in particular, you seem to have "negative"
information.

Its also worth remembering that highway= indicates the purpose of the
road or track, a number of other tags indicate its condition. In theory ....

David


On 10/02/17 10:51, Warren wrote:

> I have asked this question before but did not really get a clear answer.
>
> I am working off the Western Australian Main Roads data checking
> against the OSM road attributes.  Occasionally I come across lines
> that are classed in OSM as highway:unclassified or highway:residential
> that do not appear on the Main Roads data base.
>
> I would argue that these are named tracks rather than roads but I
> wanted to check others opinion.
>
> Do I leave them alone or change the classification to highway:track?
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-au mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au


_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: When is a Road a Track

Warin
The NSW LPT base map is particularly helpful for road classifications ..
tracks, unclassified, tertiary and paths.
It is in some ways better than a survey as it looks to take into account
the importance to the community and that is very hard to determine by
simply travelling the road.

Where a 'track' travels a long distance .. say over 50 km I would argue
that it is 'unclassified' as that length suggests it is not a simple
service/maintenance track but a connection between distant points.
As far as seeking out the 'interesting/adventure' roads .. I first look
for unpaved, then connecting. The old 'Tracks for Australia' garmin map
is helpful but well out of date.

The condition/difficulty of the road is best determined by travelling
the road, I don't add that detail unless I have travelled it. I do add
surface=unpaved/paved ...
on some bridges I remove the surface tag as I cannot be certain what is
there, on a few I change it to concrete.

On 10-Feb-17 05:55 PM, David Bannon wrote:

>
> Do you mean without seeing them yourself Warren ?  I personally think
> that you should only correct another mapper's work if you have
> personally seen something that needs correction. I am sure there are
> some exceptions. But here, in particular, you seem to have "negative"
> information.
>
> Its also worth remembering that highway= indicates the purpose of the
> road or track, a number of other tags indicate its condition. In
> theory ....
>
> David
>
>
> On 10/02/17 10:51, Warren wrote:
>> I have asked this question before but did not really get a clear answer.
>>
>> I am working off the Western Australian Main Roads data checking
>> against the OSM road attributes.  Occasionally I come across lines
>> that are classed in OSM as highway:unclassified or
>> highway:residential that do not appear on the Main Roads data base.
>>
>> I would argue that these are named tracks rather than roads but I
>> wanted to check others opinion.
>>
>> Do I leave them alone or change the classification to highway:track?
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Talk-au mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-au mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au



_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: When is a Road a Track

Ross Scanlon

On 11/02/17 07:00, Warin wrote:

> The NSW LPT base map is particularly helpful for road classifications
> .. tracks, unclassified, tertiary and paths.
> It is in some ways better than a survey as it looks to take into
> account the importance to the community and that is very hard to
> determine by simply travelling the road.
>
> Where a 'track' travels a long distance .. say over 50 km I would
> argue that it is 'unclassified' as that length suggests it is not a
> simple service/maintenance track but a connection between distant points.
> As far as seeking out the 'interesting/adventure' roads .. I first
> look for unpaved, then connecting. The old 'Tracks for Australia'
> garmin map is helpful but well out of date.

So your saying above that a track like the Canning Stock Route should be
an unclassified road?  It's about 1800kms and is definitely a track not
a road.  There are some sections you could possibly call an unclassified
road but they are not maintained.  For the majority of it's length it is
two wheel tracks through the scrub and sand dunes.

I'd suggest everyone have a read of the wiki pages for track and
unclassified.  I've always tagged them by looking to see if they are
maintained/graded.  If they are graded, and that's generally pretty
obvious from aerial imagery as well, then they are minimum
unclassified.  If not then they are tracks.

Have a look at this area in josm, with bing imagery

http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=15/-30.0090/116.8188


or here it is on bing maps:

https://binged.it/2kcYMV6

and where it's unsealed

https://binged.it/2kd8irh


Looking at the road that comes up from the south east and then according
to MRWA it continues to the north west.
MRWA classifies the south east part as osm tertiary and the north west
part as unclassified.

However I'd tag the north west part as track as it's little more than
two wheel tracks through the scrub and the further you go along it the
more it deteriorates.

>
> The condition/difficulty of the road is best determined by travelling
> the road, I don't add that detail unless I have travelled it. I do add
> surface=unpaved/paved ...
> on some bridges I remove the surface tag as I cannot be certain what
> is there, on a few I change it to concrete.
>
> On 10-Feb-17 05:55 PM, David Bannon wrote:
>>
>> Do you mean without seeing them yourself Warren ?  I personally think
>> that you should only correct another mapper's work if you have
>> personally seen something that needs correction. I am sure there are
>> some exceptions. But here, in particular, you seem to have "negative"
>> information.
>>
>> Its also worth remembering that highway= indicates the purpose of the
>> road or track, a number of other tags indicate its condition. In
>> theory ....
>>
>> David
>>
>>
>> On 10/02/17 10:51, Warren wrote:
>>> I have asked this question before but did not really get a clear
>>> answer.
>>>
>>> I am working off the Western Australian Main Roads data checking
>>> against the OSM road attributes.  Occasionally I come across lines
>>> that are classed in OSM as highway:unclassified or
>>> highway:residential that do not appear on the Main Roads data base.
>>>
>>> I would argue that these are named tracks rather than roads but I
>>> wanted to check others opinion.
>>>
>>> Do I leave them alone or change the classification to highway:track?
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Talk-au mailing list
>>> [hidden email]
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Talk-au mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-au mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au


_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: When is a Road a Track

Warin
On 11-Feb-17 11:28 AM, Ross Scanlon wrote:

On 11/02/17 07:00, Warin wrote:
The NSW LPT base map is particularly helpful for road classifications .. tracks, unclassified, tertiary and paths.
It is in some ways better than a survey as it looks to take into account the importance to the community and that is very hard to determine by simply travelling the road.

Where a 'track' travels a long distance .. say over 50 km I would argue that it is 'unclassified' as that length suggests it is not a simple service/maintenance track but a connection between distant points.
As far as seeking out the 'interesting/adventure' roads .. I first look for unpaved, then connecting. The old 'Tracks for Australia' garmin map is helpful but well out of date.

So your saying above that a track like the Canning Stock Route should be an unclassified road?  It's about 1800kms and is definitely a track not a road.  There are some sections you could possibly call an unclassified road but they are not maintained.  For the majority of it's length it is two wheel tracks through the scrub and sand dunes.

I'd suggest everyone have a read of the wiki pages for track and unclassified.

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dtrack
"roads for mostly agricultural use, forest tracks"
"classify them as usual according to the conventions in your country,"
"vehicular use is dominated by field access or forest management, but not any heavier sort of industry. "

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dunclassified
"
used for minor public roads typically at the lowest level of the interconnecting grid "
"
The least important sort of minor roads which are either a) proper signposted formal parts of the public road network, or b) nominally private or just unsignposted but the locals use them anyway. The idea is that "4"-wheel vehicular use by the general public is possible, the general public use dominates other uses, and no single specific purpose dominates. "

These are not clear and there is suggestions to refer to the country guidelines
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines#Unsealed_and_4wd_Roads_.28Dirt.2C_Gravel.2C_Formed.2C_etc.29

and that is not clear either.

I've always tagged them by looking to see if they are maintained/graded.  If they are graded, and that's generally pretty obvious from aerial imagery as well, then they are minimum unclassified.  If not then they are tracks.

How frequently are they graded? Sections of the Canning are graded. A track locally to me was recently graded .. last grading was probably done 20 years ago ...but I'd not call it 'unclassified' as it is not important enough. It is in quite good condition now.


Have a look at this area in josm, with bing imagery

http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=15/-30.0090/116.8188


or here it is on bing maps:

https://binged.it/2kcYMV6

and where it's unsealed

https://binged.it/2kd8irh


Looking at the road that comes up from the south east and then according to MRWA it continues to the north west.
MRWA classifies the south east part as osm tertiary and the north west part as unclassified.

However I'd tag the north west part as track as it's little more than two wheel tracks through the scrub and the further you go along it the more it deteriorates.


The condition/difficulty of the road is best determined by travelling the road, I don't add that detail unless I have travelled it. I do add surface=unpaved/paved ...
on some bridges I remove the surface tag as I cannot be certain what is there, on a few I change it to concrete.

On 10-Feb-17 05:55 PM, David Bannon wrote:

Do you mean without seeing them yourself Warren ?  I personally think that you should only correct another mapper's work if you have personally seen something that needs correction. I am sure there are some exceptions. But here, in particular, you seem to have "negative" information.

Its also worth remembering that highway= indicates the purpose of the road or track, a number of other tags indicate its condition. In theory ....

David


On 10/02/17 10:51, Warren wrote:
I have asked this question before but did not really get a clear answer.

I am working off the Western Australian Main Roads data checking against the OSM road attributes.  Occasionally I come across lines that are classed in OSM as highway:unclassified or highway:residential that do not appear on the Main Roads data base.

I would argue that these are named tracks rather than roads but I wanted to check others opinion.

Do I leave them alone or change the classification to highway:track?


_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au


_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au



_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au


_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au



_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: When is a Road a Track

Ross Scanlon



On 11/02/17 12:21, Warin wrote:
On 11-Feb-17 11:28 AM, Ross Scanlon wrote:

On 11/02/17 07:00, Warin wrote:
The NSW LPT base map is particularly helpful for road classifications .. tracks, unclassified, tertiary and paths.
It is in some ways better than a survey as it looks to take into account the importance to the community and that is very hard to determine by simply travelling the road.

Where a 'track' travels a long distance .. say over 50 km I would argue that it is 'unclassified' as that length suggests it is not a simple service/maintenance track but a connection between distant points.
As far as seeking out the 'interesting/adventure' roads .. I first look for unpaved, then connecting. The old 'Tracks for Australia' garmin map is helpful but well out of date.

So your saying above that a track like the Canning Stock Route should be an unclassified road?  It's about 1800kms and is definitely a track not a road.  There are some sections you could possibly call an unclassified road but they are not maintained.  For the majority of it's length it is two wheel tracks through the scrub and sand dunes.

I'd suggest everyone have a read of the wiki pages for track and unclassified.

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dtrack
"roads for mostly agricultural use, forest tracks"
"classify them as usual according to the conventions in your country,"

You conveniently left out the rest of this sentence:

" Do not use tracks to represent public unpaved roads in built-up areas [1], that would be considered tagging for the renderer. In this situation, classify them as usual according to the conventions in your country, and also provide a surface=* tag."


My bolding.

"vehicular use is dominated by field access or forest management, but not any heavier sort of industry. "

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dunclassified
"
used for minor public roads typically at the lowest level of the interconnecting grid "
"
The least important sort of minor roads which are either a) proper signposted formal parts of the public road network, or b) nominally private or just unsignposted but the locals use them anyway. The idea is that "4"-wheel vehicular use by the general public is possible, the general public use dominates other uses, and no single specific purpose dominates. "

These are not clear and there is suggestions to refer to the country guidelines
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines#Unsealed_and_4wd_Roads_.28Dirt.2C_Gravel.2C_Formed.2C_etc.29

and that is not clear either.

I've always tagged them by looking to see if they are maintained/graded.  If they are graded, and that's generally pretty obvious from aerial imagery as well, then they are minimum unclassified.  If not then they are tracks.

How frequently are they graded? Sections of the Canning are graded. A track locally to me was recently graded .. last grading was probably done 20 years ago ...but I'd not call it 'unclassified' as it is not important enough. It is in quite good condition now.

As I said sections of the CSR are probably unclassified, but the remainder is definitely a track.  There's always exceptions, so the "a track longer than 50kms" really does not apply to tracks like the CSR.   And the CSR can

I'm talking about well maintained roads by council or state governments, graded at least once a year and could be sealed easily with spray pave if needed it's just an example of what is a road and not a track.  There are lots of these in WA in particular that are tagged as track but should really be unclassified surface=gravel/ground.

Tracks are like the image on the highway=track wiki page.  The actual track is only maintained by the passage of vehicles along it.



Have a look at this area in josm, with bing imagery

http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=15/-30.0090/116.8188


or here it is on bing maps:

https://binged.it/2kcYMV6

and where it's unsealed

https://binged.it/2kd8irh


Looking at the road that comes up from the south east and then according to MRWA it continues to the north west.
MRWA classifies the south east part as osm tertiary and the north west part as unclassified.

However I'd tag the north west part as track as it's little more than two wheel tracks through the scrub and the further you go along it the more it deteriorates.


The condition/difficulty of the road is best determined by travelling the road, I don't add that detail unless I have travelled it. I do add surface=unpaved/paved ...
on some bridges I remove the surface tag as I cannot be certain what is there, on a few I change it to concrete.

On 10-Feb-17 05:55 PM, David Bannon wrote:

Do you mean without seeing them yourself Warren ?  I personally think that you should only correct another mapper's work if you have personally seen something that needs correction. I am sure there are some exceptions. But here, in particular, you seem to have "negative" information.

Its also worth remembering that highway= indicates the purpose of the road or track, a number of other tags indicate its condition. In theory ....

David


On 10/02/17 10:51, Warren wrote:
I have asked this question before but did not really get a clear answer.

I am working off the Western Australian Main Roads data checking against the OSM road attributes.  Occasionally I come across lines that are classed in OSM as highway:unclassified or highway:residential that do not appear on the Main Roads data base.

I would argue that these are named tracks rather than roads but I wanted to check others opinion.

Do I leave them alone or change the classification to highway:track?


_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au


_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au



_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au


_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au




_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au


_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au