Hi. Sometimes it looks that people are drawing roads from a line of dirt....an actual dirt road. Other times it looks like people are drawing roads from ongoing spaces between trees. IT doesn't look like a road was actually made, but that you can still walk the area between the trees. Do we indicate roads in both cases?

The tutorial says roads should always lead to a structure, but it seems like they don't but people drawn them to one anyway. They just seem to create a line from the road to a building, whether there is an actual side road leading from the main road to the building or not. Thanks.

asked 13 Jan '17, 23:34

Map4theWorld's gravatar image

Map4theWorld
40224
accept rate: 0%

2

Can you please link to examples? If you want to link to a place in OSM, just move the map to that place and copy what's in the browser URL. Alternatively, you can link to a changeset, or an object.

Also, which "tutorial" are you reading? Can you link to that?

(13 Jan '17, 23:46) SomeoneElse ♦

Yes if it can be used it should be mapped. I would hope that all paths, tracks, trails and other roads have been surveyed by the mapper, with their feet, or wheels on the ground. Any passable hiking path could be useful at sometime. All mapped paths should ideally have accurate tags such as dirt, a width, is it public, is it suitable for bikes, ect. Roads or trails don't have to go to a building. It could be to a mountain peak, a nice view or a fishing spot, or a river crossing point for example. The problem of relying on aerial images is most are several years old and areas get developed or neglected, so survey as well. Happy mapping, you cant beat fresh air.

permanent link

answered 14 Jan '17, 07:47

andy%20mackey's gravatar image

andy mackey
11.5k73125255
accept rate: 4%

I would prefer if only established roads or paths are mapped, not just any "path" that would take you to your destination. A typical lawn for example can be walked pretty much anywhere, but that doesn't mean it should be plastered over with imaginary footways.

(14 Jan '17, 11:28) Hjart

Pathways tagged with surface=grass are somtimes plastered on a park to indicate to routers the correct route by foot linking other more contructed footways with surface=concrete.

(14 Jan '17, 13:36) nevw
1

Thinking about the upland grassland that can be legally accessed in England, Wales and Scotland now it seems to me that gaps or gates in walls and barbed wire and the paths leading to them should be mapped otherwise you could find yourself a bit stuck. But I do see that perhaps some grassland could have too many, maybe unnecessary paths. If an area may be sort of all open, It could be that some routes we could guess at are too thorny, boggy, rocky, steep or are blocked by a deep stream, so a practical route should I think be mapped.

(14 Jan '17, 16:11) andy mackey

If we were in the hills somewhere and the weather turned bad or some one was injured we would like to pick a mapped shortest path not guess and hope there is a way down.

(14 Jan '17, 16:17) andy mackey
2

Sometimes the paths seen on a hillside or across land are trails made by grazing animals following land contours, rather than deliberately being formed by people. If a path is uncertain you could tag the way as an area. In forests, sometimes what looks like a path or track is in reality a fire break or log skid track that follows a ridge line or steep gully. These may be impossible to navigate without ropes and climbing equipment. Visiting a place like that can be very informative, since what can be seen from aerial imagery can be very different on the ground. The real track can be hidden under the forest canopy and not visible from above.

(15 Jan '17, 04:44) Huttite

As i said: I would hope that all paths, tracks, trails and other roads have been surveyed by the mapper

(15 Jan '17, 08:37) andy mackey
3

Several HOT tasks which I participated in instructed us to consider several parallel tracks as only one. These tasks were often around desert villages where you could pretty much drive anywhere and tracks could indeed be seen all over the place in the imagery we used. The thing is that mapping each and every of these tracks would actually make the map hard to read and practically useless, so we ignored most of them and only mapped enough of them to make navigation usable.

(15 Jan '17, 19:13) Hjart

I was thinking of leisure walkers and possible needs which has differing mapping requirements to HOT, of which i have zero experience.

(15 Jan '17, 20:36) andy mackey

If this question is mainly HOT related perhaps the question should have said so. Maybe the questioner's name hints at HOT ?? Maybe someone with HOT experience could then answer it.

(15 Jan '17, 20:48) andy mackey
showing 5 of 9 show 4 more comments
Your answer
toggle preview

Follow this question

By Email:

Once you sign in you will be able to subscribe for any updates here

By RSS:

Answers

Answers and Comments

Markdown Basics

  • *italic* or _italic_
  • **bold** or __bold__
  • link:[text](http://url.com/ "title")
  • image?![alt text](/path/img.jpg "title")
  • numbered list: 1. Foo 2. Bar
  • to add a line break simply add two spaces to where you would like the new line to be.
  • basic HTML tags are also supported

Question tags:

×70

question asked: 13 Jan '17, 23:34

question was seen: 1,140 times

last updated: 15 Jan '17, 20:48

powered by OSQA