Hi all, I noticed that the wiki http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:surface mentions a few more surface values which are considered unpaved compared to the default style. The current rule in the lines file contains this highway=* & (surface=cobblestone | surface=compacted | surface=dirt | surface=earth | surface=grass | surface=grass_paver | surface=gravel | surface=grit | surface=ground | surface=mud | surface=pebblestone | surface=sand | surface=unpaved | mtb:scale=* | tracktype ~ 'grade[2-6]' | smoothness ~ '.*(bad|horrible|impassable)' | sac_scale ~ '.*(mountain|alpine)_hiking' | sport=via_ferrata) { add mkgmap:unpaved=1 } The wiki also llists these as unpaved: gravel_turf , fine_gravel, ice, salt, snow, woodchips I think the rule should at least contain gravel_turf, snow, and woodchips. My understanding is that fine_gravel, ice , and salt are rather smooth surfaces. Comments? Gerd -- View this message in context: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/unpaved-roads-tp5890722.html Sent from the Mkgmap Development mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
But none are "paved" in the usual sense of that word. I would hate to drive on a "fine gravel" road, or an ice road, unless I was prepared for it. Even if the fine gravel were on top of a compacted substrate it would present a hazard to bicycles and motorcycles. I'm not sure I care how a "salt" road is classified - I've never seen one let alone driven on one. On Tue, Feb 7, 2017 at 2:41 PM, Gerd Petermann < gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com> wrote:
Hi all,
I noticed that the wiki http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:surface mentions a few more surface values which are considered unpaved compared to the default style. The current rule in the lines file contains this highway=* & (surface=cobblestone | surface=compacted | surface=dirt | surface=earth | surface=grass | surface=grass_paver | surface=gravel | surface=grit | surface=ground | surface=mud | surface=pebblestone | surface=sand | surface=unpaved | mtb:scale=* | tracktype ~ 'grade[2-6]' | smoothness ~ '.*(bad|horrible|impassable)' | sac_scale ~ '.*(mountain|alpine)_hiking' | sport=via_ferrata) { add mkgmap:unpaved=1 }
The wiki also llists these as unpaved: gravel_turf , fine_gravel, ice, salt, snow, woodchips
I think the rule should at least contain gravel_turf, snow, and woodchips. My understanding is that fine_gravel, ice , and salt are rather smooth surfaces.
Comments?
Gerd
-- View this message in context: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble. com/unpaved-roads-tp5890722.html Sent from the Mkgmap Development mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
-- Dave Swarthout Homer, Alaska Chiang Mai, Thailand Travel Blog at http://dswarthout.blogspot.com
It really depends on the user, the region etc. In my bicycle map I consider fine_gravel cycleways as paved because my users are mainly touring cyclists and those paths are (at least in my region) excellent for touring. But not suitable for racing bicycles, for them those cycleways are unpaved. I would suggest to make it unpaved for generic use and use a regular expression sytax to catch all combinations. In my OFM I solved this by using surface ~ '.*(ash|bad|clay|cob|compact|dirt|earth|erde|gr|loam|mud|peb|sand|shotter|rock|turf|unpaved).*' ________________________________ Dave wrote: But none are "paved" in the usual sense of that word. I would hate to drive on a "fine gravel" road, or an ice road, unless I was prepared for it. Even if the fine gravel were on top of a compacted substrate it would present a hazard to bicycles and motorcycles. I'm not sure I care how a "salt" road is classified - I've never seen one let alone driven on one.
Yes, quite difficult. My understanding is that we don't really care about paved/unpaved here, it is more about smoothness, and probably most of the people contributing here are cyclists. I've cycled > 33.000 km through many European countries during the last years and I'd prefer to avoid surface cobblestone or concrete:plates which are "paved" but painful while I really like to travel on fine_gravel as long as it is not raining heavily. On the racing bike I'd prefer to avoid surfaces which are not smooth, but I nearly stopped cycling on them. This "raining" part is probably what paved/unpaved is about: The surface of a paved road should not change when it's raining and your vehicle will not be covered with dirt when traveling on a paved road while it is raining (at least not from dirt which was part of the surface). Do you agree on that (last sentence)? Gerd ________________________________________ Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> im Auftrag von lig fietser <ligfietser@hotmail.com> Gesendet: Dienstag, 7. Februar 2017 09:38:03 An: Development list for mkgmap; daveswarthout@gmail.com Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] unpaved roads It really depends on the user, the region etc. In my bicycle map I consider fine_gravel cycleways as paved because my users are mainly touring cyclists and those paths are (at least in my region) excellent for touring. But not suitable for racing bicycles, for them those cycleways are unpaved. I would suggest to make it unpaved for generic use and use a regular expression sytax to catch all combinations. In my OFM I solved this by using surface ~ '.*(ash|bad|clay|cob|compact|dirt|earth|erde|gr|loam|mud|peb|sand|shotter|rock|turf|unpaved).*' ________________________________ Dave wrote: But none are "paved" in the usual sense of that word. I would hate to drive on a "fine gravel" road, or an ice road, unless I was prepared for it. Even if the fine gravel were on top of a compacted substrate it would present a hazard to bicycles and motorcycles. I'm not sure I care how a "salt" road is classified - I've never seen one let alone driven on one.
I'd call that semi-paved but Garmin doesn't have such category unfortunately. Since the default style main focus is on motor vehicles I'd suggest to add surfaces like fine_gravel, salt, ice to the unpaved list. And please add soil to it, it seems a quite popular tag. ________________________________ Gerd wrote This "raining" part is probably what paved/unpaved is about: The surface of a paved road should not change when it's raining and your vehicle will not be covered with dirt when traveling on a paved road while it is raining (at least not from dirt which was part of the surface). Do you agree on that (last sentence)? Gerd <http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev>
Hi! In Portugal, Spain and surely a little all around, unpaved gravel roads are common, even on urban neighbourhoods. These are quite drivable and they will often be the only way to get to some places. They are also suitable to all vehicles, even if they will get covered in dirt. There are also a lot of paths going through sand (forest roads) and these will unsuitable to most vehicles (even a lot of 4x4s), regardless of their width. I find that while driving, the real issue will be the road conditions and width. Will the unpaved road be wide enough for a car or light truck? Will it have deep tracks due to soil erosion? Will the surface be solid enough to drive in a regular car? So, in real world GPS usage, I would like unpaved to mean “narrow, earth roads”, while paved would mean any road suitable to all regular vehicles. Example: due to wind farms being built in a lot of hill ranges, large, unpaved roads were built. These are gravel, wide roads, and often are a better option to the paved, sinuous mountain roads that go around every nook and cranny in the valleys. So, I think that fine_gravel, salt and ice should still be “paved”. Nuno Pedrosa. PS: Sorry to “butt in” the talk. I’m usually silent in this list, though I read most of the discussions. Your work is amazing and I find that I can add little to what is being discussed, so I try to keep my “noise” to a minimum!
On 7 Feb 2017, at 09:40, lig fietser <ligfietser@hotmail.com> wrote:
I'd call that semi-paved but Garmin doesn't have such category unfortunately. Since the default style main focus is on motor vehicles I'd suggest to add surfaces like fine_gravel, salt, ice to the unpaved list. And please add soil to it, it seems a quite popular tag.
Gerd wrote This "raining" part is probably what paved/unpaved is about: The surface of a paved road should not change when it's raining and your vehicle will not be covered with dirt when traveling on a paved road while it is raining (at least not from dirt which was part of the surface).
Do you agree on that (last sentence)?
Gerd
<http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev> _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk <mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev <http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev>
Hi Nuno, you are welcome! My understanding is that everybody who thinks about the "avoid unpaved roads" feature in Garmin units a bit longer will come to the solution that they have to either accept what the preferred style is doing or else to fork an own version of that style (assuming that this is allowed). Many rules in the default style assume that you are in a rather developed country, I think they work very good for countries where traffic is similar to Germany or the UK regarding the interpretation of highway types like tertiary, secondary etc, probably not so well for many countries outside Europe. Gerd ________________________________________ Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> im Auftrag von Nuno Pedrosa <nuno.f.pedrosa@gmail.com> Gesendet: Dienstag, 7. Februar 2017 11:57:13 An: Development list for mkgmap Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] unpaved roads Hi! In Portugal, Spain and surely a little all around, unpaved gravel roads are common, even on urban neighbourhoods. These are quite drivable and they will often be the only way to get to some places. They are also suitable to all vehicles, even if they will get covered in dirt. There are also a lot of paths going through sand (forest roads) and these will unsuitable to most vehicles (even a lot of 4x4s), regardless of their width. I find that while driving, the real issue will be the road conditions and width. Will the unpaved road be wide enough for a car or light truck? Will it have deep tracks due to soil erosion? Will the surface be solid enough to drive in a regular car? So, in real world GPS usage, I would like unpaved to mean “narrow, earth roads”, while paved would mean any road suitable to all regular vehicles. Example: due to wind farms being built in a lot of hill ranges, large, unpaved roads were built. These are gravel, wide roads, and often are a better option to the paved, sinuous mountain roads that go around every nook and cranny in the valleys. So, I think that fine_gravel, salt and ice should still be “paved”. Nuno Pedrosa. PS: Sorry to “butt in” the talk. I’m usually silent in this list, though I read most of the discussions. Your work is amazing and I find that I can add little to what is being discussed, so I try to keep my “noise” to a minimum! On 7 Feb 2017, at 09:40, lig fietser <ligfietser@hotmail.com<mailto:ligfietser@hotmail.com>> wrote: I'd call that semi-paved but Garmin doesn't have such category unfortunately. Since the default style main focus is on motor vehicles I'd suggest to add surfaces like fine_gravel, salt, ice to the unpaved list. And please add soil to it, it seems a quite popular tag. ________________________________ Gerd wrote This "raining" part is probably what paved/unpaved is about: The surface of a paved road should not change when it's raining and your vehicle will not be covered with dirt when traveling on a paved road while it is raining (at least not from dirt which was part of the surface). Do you agree on that (last sentence)? Gerd <http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev> _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
I don't agree with you. I think default style is a generic style, and as such, it shouldn't do much guess but use the strict meaning of tags. Gravel, fine_gravel, ice, etc. are strictly unpaved and I would mark them as such in default style. More specific uses (mtb/race bicycle/4wd...) require specific maps and thus specific styles. @Mark: I'm also cyclist and for mtb use your "raining" point of view of paved/unpaved is important to be considered. El 07/02/17 a las 11:57, Nuno Pedrosa escribió:
Hi! In Portugal, Spain and surely a little all around, unpaved gravel roads are common, even on urban neighbourhoods. These are quite drivable and they will often be the only way to get to some places. They are also suitable to all vehicles, even if they will get covered in dirt. There are also a lot of paths going through sand (forest roads) and these will unsuitable to most vehicles (even a lot of 4x4s), regardless of their width.
I find that while driving, the real issue will be the road conditions and width. Will the unpaved road be wide enough for a car or light truck? Will it have deep tracks due to soil erosion? Will the surface be solid enough to drive in a regular car?
So, in real world GPS usage, I would like unpaved to mean “narrow, earth roads”, while paved would mean any road suitable to all regular vehicles. Example: due to wind farms being built in a lot of hill ranges, large, unpaved roads were built. These are gravel, wide roads, and often are a better option to the paved, sinuous mountain roads that go around every nook and cranny in the valleys.
So, I think that fine_gravel, salt and ice should still be “paved”.
Nuno Pedrosa.
PS: Sorry to “butt in” the talk. I’m usually silent in this list, though I read most of the discussions. Your work is amazing and I find that I can add little to what is being discussed, so I try to keep my “noise” to a minimum!
On 7 Feb 2017, at 09:40, lig fietser <ligfietser@hotmail.com <mailto:ligfietser@hotmail.com>> wrote:
I'd call that semi-paved but Garmin doesn't have such category unfortunately. Since the default style main focus is on motor vehicles I'd suggest to add surfaces like fine_gravel, salt, ice to the unpaved list. And please add soil to it, it seems a quite popular tag.
------------------------------------------------------------------------ Gerd wrote This "raining" part is probably what paved/unpaved is about: The surface of a paved road should not change when it's raining and your vehicle will not be covered with dirt when traveling on a paved road while it is raining (at least not from dirt which was part of the surface).
Do you agree on that (last sentence)?
Gerd
Hi all, I tried to create a patch for the rules which set mkgmap:unpaved using the wiki and taginfo: https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/surface#values One probem with surface is that we have so many values (taginfo lists 4844 different today), many of them typos or combinations like "ground;grass" or nonsense like "paved;unpaved" I guess many of the latter were produced by "connect ways" functions in OSM editors, so not fully intended. Anyhow, my impression is that it would be better to change the rule so that it checks the known paved surfaces and assumes that all others mean unpaved. The current rules are quite old, it was introduced with r1425 and last changed with r1489. Comments? Gerd ________________________________________ Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> im Auftrag von Carlos Dávila <cdavilam@orangecorreo.es> Gesendet: Dienstag, 7. Februar 2017 12:39:49 An: Development list for mkgmap Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] unpaved roads I don't agree with you. I think default style is a generic style, and as such, it shouldn't do much guess but use the strict meaning of tags. Gravel, fine_gravel, ice, etc. are strictly unpaved and I would mark them as such in default style. More specific uses (mtb/race bicycle/4wd...) require specific maps and thus specific styles. @Mark: I'm also cyclist and for mtb use your "raining" point of view of paved/unpaved is important to be considered. El 07/02/17 a las 11:57, Nuno Pedrosa escribió:
Hi! In Portugal, Spain and surely a little all around, unpaved gravel roads are common, even on urban neighbourhoods. These are quite drivable and they will often be the only way to get to some places. They are also suitable to all vehicles, even if they will get covered in dirt. There are also a lot of paths going through sand (forest roads) and these will unsuitable to most vehicles (even a lot of 4x4s), regardless of their width.
I find that while driving, the real issue will be the road conditions and width. Will the unpaved road be wide enough for a car or light truck? Will it have deep tracks due to soil erosion? Will the surface be solid enough to drive in a regular car?
So, in real world GPS usage, I would like unpaved to mean “narrow, earth roads”, while paved would mean any road suitable to all regular vehicles. Example: due to wind farms being built in a lot of hill ranges, large, unpaved roads were built. These are gravel, wide roads, and often are a better option to the paved, sinuous mountain roads that go around every nook and cranny in the valleys.
So, I think that fine_gravel, salt and ice should still be “paved”.
Nuno Pedrosa.
PS: Sorry to “butt in” the talk. I’m usually silent in this list, though I read most of the discussions. Your work is amazing and I find that I can add little to what is being discussed, so I try to keep my “noise” to a minimum!
On 7 Feb 2017, at 09:40, lig fietser <ligfietser@hotmail.com <mailto:ligfietser@hotmail.com>> wrote:
I'd call that semi-paved but Garmin doesn't have such category unfortunately. Since the default style main focus is on motor vehicles I'd suggest to add surfaces like fine_gravel, salt, ice to the unpaved list. And please add soil to it, it seems a quite popular tag.
------------------------------------------------------------------------ Gerd wrote This "raining" part is probably what paved/unpaved is about: The surface of a paved road should not change when it's raining and your vehicle will not be covered with dirt when traveling on a paved road while it is raining (at least not from dirt which was part of the surface).
Do you agree on that (last sentence)?
Gerd
_______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
Gerd, I suppose you first look if surface=* ? And what if surface is empty? Gerd wrote: Anyhow, my impression is that it would be better to change the rule so that it checks the known paved surfaces and assumes that all others mean unpaved. The current rules are quite old, it was introduced with r1425 and last changed with r1489. Comments? Gerd
ligfietser wrote
I suppose you first look if surface=* ? And what if surface is empty?
Good point. My understanding is that most road types are paved unless stated otherwise. Exception: hw=track, bridleway, unsurfaced, maybe also path, although I don't like that one. Gerd -- View this message in context: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/unpaved-roads-tp5890722p5890863.html Sent from the Mkgmap Development mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Gerd Petermann <GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com> writes:
I tried to create a patch for the rules which set mkgmap:unpaved using the wiki and taginfo: https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/surface#values
One probem with surface is that we have so many values (taginfo lists 4844 different today), many of them typos or combinations like "ground;grass" or nonsense like "paved;unpaved" I guess many of the latter were produced by "connect ways" functions in OSM editors, so not fully intended.
Anyhow, my impression is that it would be better to change the rule so that it checks the known paved surfaces and assumes that all others mean unpaved. The current rules are quite old, it was introduced with r1425 and last changed with r1489.
[I know I'm late to replying; I left the thread unread until I had time to read it and think a bit.] One question is what should "unpaved" mean. That probably depends on car vs bicycle, and it seems the real issue is that the Garmin format isn't expressive enough to allow routing to decide later what it wants to use. Thus we are having to map each road to a paved yes/no, road class, and speed class. Another way to look at this is to ask why we are representing unpaved roads, and what the routing policy is we are trying to achieve by that. In my case, for car, generally what I want is to not use rough roads (dirt, and even cobblestone) unless it's more or less necessary, which I'd define as being the only way or saving lots of time, even if I drive 10 km/h on the rough road. So I would suggest that we think of the Garmin unpaved flag as a "this is a road I want to avoid, as opposed to a road I don't want to avoid" bit, and not be so fixated on what paved means. That may mean different people build images with different rules. Then, I would think about what an optimal route is, and how to get the Garmin unit to compute one when it thinks it is doing shortest time and avoiding unpaved. So I would use the unpaved flag for roads that you really don't want to use, even if they save time, and use lower speed classes for roads that you have a mild preference for avoiding. Of course, I am not really sure how this would work. And I realize it's trickier with bicycle, where you care about pleasant/safe and time is not so much the point. But I think the only way is to try to map some utility function into inverse speed and let the Garmin unit try to minimize time, since apparently there's no way to compute other utility functions directly. So basically if you'd rather ride 5 miles on road A than 1 mile on road B, as an alternative to get someplace, set A's speed to 5x B's speed, and then min time will do the right thing, even if you get bad time estimates.
Ok. But that will mean that in a generic map, a lot of places will be unroutable if the GPS is avoiding all unpaved roads. To reach them, the user will need to allow unpaved roads in the route. This will mean routing through sand roads and gravel roads alike. It would be great if the GPS could handle semi-paved roads, as was mentioned, but it can't. In a generic map, what will be most important? To reach the destination, or to avoid getting dirt in the car? In Cadiz, Finca Las Lomas, s/n, 11179 Vejer de la Frontera, Cádiz, Spain, would be mostly unreachable if avoiding gravel roads. https://www.google.pt/maps/place/Escuelas+Profesionales+de+la+Sagrada+Familia+Nuestra+Señora+del+Buen+Consejo+de+las+Lomas/@36.2938403,-5.8821947,17z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m5!3m4!1s0xd0c5074acf746b9:0x32a4ea0ba5f0c3d!8m2!3d36.293836!4d-5.880006 <https://www.google.pt/maps/place/Escuelas+Profesionales+de+la+Sagrada+Familia+Nuestra+Se%C3%B1ora+del+Buen+Consejo+de+las+Lomas/@36.2938403,-5.8821947,17z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m5!3m4!1s0xd0c5074acf746b9:0x32a4ea0ba5f0c3d!8m2!3d36.293836!4d-5.880006> There are lots of places like this. A side-thought: paved roads aren’t always the best option for a given region. They are more expensive to build and when they degrade, they get “hard holes”(*) and fixing them up will usually create bumps in every hole. If the traffic is low, gravel roads will probably be a better option and better yet if rain is uncommon, as is the case in southern Europe. Nuno Pedrosa (*) by “hard holes”, I mean pot-holes where the edges are very steep and the wheels will crash into it. Gravel roads tend to create pot-holes with soft edges, a lot easier to drive over.
On 7 Feb 2017, at 11:39, Carlos Dávila <cdavilam@orangecorreo.es> wrote:
I don't agree with you. I think default style is a generic style, and as such, it shouldn't do much guess but use the strict meaning of tags. Gravel, fine_gravel, ice, etc. are strictly unpaved and I would mark them as such in default style. More specific uses (mtb/race bicycle/4wd...) require specific maps and thus specific styles. @Mark: I'm also cyclist and for mtb use your "raining" point of view of paved/unpaved is important to be considered.
El 07/02/17 a las 11:57, Nuno Pedrosa escribió:
Hi! In Portugal, Spain and surely a little all around, unpaved gravel roads are common, even on urban neighbourhoods. These are quite drivable and they will often be the only way to get to some places. They are also suitable to all vehicles, even if they will get covered in dirt. There are also a lot of paths going through sand (forest roads) and these will unsuitable to most vehicles (even a lot of 4x4s), regardless of their width.
I find that while driving, the real issue will be the road conditions and width. Will the unpaved road be wide enough for a car or light truck? Will it have deep tracks due to soil erosion? Will the surface be solid enough to drive in a regular car?
So, in real world GPS usage, I would like unpaved to mean “narrow, earth roads”, while paved would mean any road suitable to all regular vehicles. Example: due to wind farms being built in a lot of hill ranges, large, unpaved roads were built. These are gravel, wide roads, and often are a better option to the paved, sinuous mountain roads that go around every nook and cranny in the valleys.
So, I think that fine_gravel, salt and ice should still be “paved”.
Nuno Pedrosa.
PS: Sorry to “butt in” the talk. I’m usually silent in this list, though I read most of the discussions. Your work is amazing and I find that I can add little to what is being discussed, so I try to keep my “noise” to a minimum!
On 7 Feb 2017, at 09:40, lig fietser <ligfietser@hotmail.com <mailto:ligfietser@hotmail.com> <mailto:ligfietser@hotmail.com <mailto:ligfietser@hotmail.com>>> wrote:
I'd call that semi-paved but Garmin doesn't have such category unfortunately. Since the default style main focus is on motor vehicles I'd suggest to add surfaces like fine_gravel, salt, ice to the unpaved list. And please add soil to it, it seems a quite popular tag.
------------------------------------------------------------------------ Gerd wrote This "raining" part is probably what paved/unpaved is about: The surface of a paved road should not change when it's raining and your vehicle will not be covered with dirt when traveling on a paved road while it is raining (at least not from dirt which was part of the surface).
Do you agree on that (last sentence)?
Gerd
_______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
Hu Nuna, If I got that right the Garmin algo uses unpaved roads if the target is only reachable via unpaved roads, at least if the target itself is an unpaved road. Gerd ________________________________________ Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> im Auftrag von Nuno Pedrosa <nuno.f.pedrosa@gmail.com> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 8. Februar 2017 12:27:11 An: Development list for mkgmap Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] unpaved roads Ok. But that will mean that in a generic map, a lot of places will be unroutable if the GPS is avoiding all unpaved roads. To reach them, the user will need to allow unpaved roads in the route. This will mean routing through sand roads and gravel roads alike. It would be great if the GPS could handle semi-paved roads, as was mentioned, but it can't. In a generic map, what will be most important? To reach the destination, or to avoid getting dirt in the car? In Cadiz, Finca Las Lomas, s/n, 11179 Vejer de la Frontera, Cádiz, Spain, would be mostly unreachable if avoiding gravel roads. https://www.google.pt/maps/place/Escuelas+Profesionales+de+la+Sagrada+Familia+Nuestra+Señora+del+Buen+Consejo+de+las+Lomas/@36.2938403,-5.8821947,17z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m5!3m4!1s0xd0c5074acf746b9:0x32a4ea0ba5f0c3d!8m2!3d36.293836!4d-5.880006<https://www.google.pt/maps/place/Escuelas+Profesionales+de+la+Sagrada+Familia+Nuestra+Se%C3%B1ora+del+Buen+Consejo+de+las+Lomas/@36.2938403,-5.8821947,17z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m5!3m4!1s0xd0c5074acf746b9:0x32a4ea0ba5f0c3d!8m2!3d36.293836!4d-5.880006> There are lots of places like this. A side-thought: paved roads aren’t always the best option for a given region. They are more expensive to build and when they degrade, they get “hard holes”(*) and fixing them up will usually create bumps in every hole. If the traffic is low, gravel roads will probably be a better option and better yet if rain is uncommon, as is the case in southern Europe. Nuno Pedrosa (*) by “hard holes”, I mean pot-holes where the edges are very steep and the wheels will crash into it. Gravel roads tend to create pot-holes with soft edges, a lot easier to drive over. On 7 Feb 2017, at 11:39, Carlos Dávila <cdavilam@orangecorreo.es<mailto:cdavilam@orangecorreo.es>> wrote: I don't agree with you. I think default style is a generic style, and as such, it shouldn't do much guess but use the strict meaning of tags. Gravel, fine_gravel, ice, etc. are strictly unpaved and I would mark them as such in default style. More specific uses (mtb/race bicycle/4wd...) require specific maps and thus specific styles. @Mark: I'm also cyclist and for mtb use your "raining" point of view of paved/unpaved is important to be considered. El 07/02/17 a las 11:57, Nuno Pedrosa escribió: Hi! In Portugal, Spain and surely a little all around, unpaved gravel roads are common, even on urban neighbourhoods. These are quite drivable and they will often be the only way to get to some places. They are also suitable to all vehicles, even if they will get covered in dirt. There are also a lot of paths going through sand (forest roads) and these will unsuitable to most vehicles (even a lot of 4x4s), regardless of their width. I find that while driving, the real issue will be the road conditions and width. Will the unpaved road be wide enough for a car or light truck? Will it have deep tracks due to soil erosion? Will the surface be solid enough to drive in a regular car? So, in real world GPS usage, I would like unpaved to mean “narrow, earth roads”, while paved would mean any road suitable to all regular vehicles. Example: due to wind farms being built in a lot of hill ranges, large, unpaved roads were built. These are gravel, wide roads, and often are a better option to the paved, sinuous mountain roads that go around every nook and cranny in the valleys. So, I think that fine_gravel, salt and ice should still be “paved”. Nuno Pedrosa. PS: Sorry to “butt in” the talk. I’m usually silent in this list, though I read most of the discussions. Your work is amazing and I find that I can add little to what is being discussed, so I try to keep my “noise” to a minimum! On 7 Feb 2017, at 09:40, lig fietser <ligfietser@hotmail.com<mailto:ligfietser@hotmail.com> <mailto:ligfietser@hotmail.com>> wrote: I'd call that semi-paved but Garmin doesn't have such category unfortunately. Since the default style main focus is on motor vehicles I'd suggest to add surfaces like fine_gravel, salt, ice to the unpaved list. And please add soil to it, it seems a quite popular tag. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Gerd wrote This "raining" part is probably what paved/unpaved is about: The surface of a paved road should not change when it's raining and your vehicle will not be covered with dirt when traveling on a paved road while it is raining (at least not from dirt which was part of the surface). Do you agree on that (last sentence)? Gerd _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
Hi Gerd, I’m not sure about that, but it makes sense. Thank you, Nuno Pedrosa.
On 8 Feb 2017, at 12:11, Gerd Petermann <GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com> wrote:
Hu Nuna,
If I got that right the Garmin algo uses unpaved roads if the target is only reachable via unpaved roads, at least if the target itself is an unpaved road.
Gerd ________________________________________ Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> im Auftrag von Nuno Pedrosa <nuno.f.pedrosa@gmail.com> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 8. Februar 2017 12:27:11 An: Development list for mkgmap Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] unpaved roads
Ok. But that will mean that in a generic map, a lot of places will be unroutable if the GPS is avoiding all unpaved roads. To reach them, the user will need to allow unpaved roads in the route. This will mean routing through sand roads and gravel roads alike. It would be great if the GPS could handle semi-paved roads, as was mentioned, but it can't.
In a generic map, what will be most important? To reach the destination, or to avoid getting dirt in the car? In Cadiz, Finca Las Lomas, s/n, 11179 Vejer de la Frontera, Cádiz, Spain, would be mostly unreachable if avoiding gravel roads. https://www.google.pt/maps/place/Escuelas+Profesionales+de+la+Sagrada+Familia+Nuestra+Señora+del+Buen+Consejo+de+las+Lomas/@36.2938403,-5.8821947,17z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m5!3m4!1s0xd0c5074acf746b9:0x32a4ea0ba5f0c3d!8m2!3d36.293836!4d-5.880006<https://www.google.pt/maps/place/Escuelas+Profesionales+de+la+Sagrada+Familia+Nuestra+Se%C3%B1ora+del+Buen+Consejo+de+las+Lomas/@36.2938403,-5.8821947,17z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m5!3m4!1s0xd0c5074acf746b9:0x32a4ea0ba5f0c3d!8m2!3d36.293836!4d-5.880006> There are lots of places like this.
A side-thought: paved roads aren’t always the best option for a given region. They are more expensive to build and when they degrade, they get “hard holes”(*) and fixing them up will usually create bumps in every hole. If the traffic is low, gravel roads will probably be a better option and better yet if rain is uncommon, as is the case in southern Europe.
Nuno Pedrosa
(*) by “hard holes”, I mean pot-holes where the edges are very steep and the wheels will crash into it. Gravel roads tend to create pot-holes with soft edges, a lot easier to drive over.
On 7 Feb 2017, at 11:39, Carlos Dávila <cdavilam@orangecorreo.es<mailto:cdavilam@orangecorreo.es>> wrote:
I don't agree with you. I think default style is a generic style, and as such, it shouldn't do much guess but use the strict meaning of tags. Gravel, fine_gravel, ice, etc. are strictly unpaved and I would mark them as such in default style. More specific uses (mtb/race bicycle/4wd...) require specific maps and thus specific styles. @Mark: I'm also cyclist and for mtb use your "raining" point of view of paved/unpaved is important to be considered.
El 07/02/17 a las 11:57, Nuno Pedrosa escribió: Hi! In Portugal, Spain and surely a little all around, unpaved gravel roads are common, even on urban neighbourhoods. These are quite drivable and they will often be the only way to get to some places. They are also suitable to all vehicles, even if they will get covered in dirt. There are also a lot of paths going through sand (forest roads) and these will unsuitable to most vehicles (even a lot of 4x4s), regardless of their width.
I find that while driving, the real issue will be the road conditions and width. Will the unpaved road be wide enough for a car or light truck? Will it have deep tracks due to soil erosion? Will the surface be solid enough to drive in a regular car?
So, in real world GPS usage, I would like unpaved to mean “narrow, earth roads”, while paved would mean any road suitable to all regular vehicles. Example: due to wind farms being built in a lot of hill ranges, large, unpaved roads were built. These are gravel, wide roads, and often are a better option to the paved, sinuous mountain roads that go around every nook and cranny in the valleys.
So, I think that fine_gravel, salt and ice should still be “paved”.
Nuno Pedrosa.
PS: Sorry to “butt in” the talk. I’m usually silent in this list, though I read most of the discussions. Your work is amazing and I find that I can add little to what is being discussed, so I try to keep my “noise” to a minimum!
On 7 Feb 2017, at 09:40, lig fietser <ligfietser@hotmail.com<mailto:ligfietser@hotmail.com> <mailto:ligfietser@hotmail.com>> wrote:
I'd call that semi-paved but Garmin doesn't have such category unfortunately. Since the default style main focus is on motor vehicles I'd suggest to add surfaces like fine_gravel, salt, ice to the unpaved list. And please add soil to it, it seems a quite popular tag.
------------------------------------------------------------------------ Gerd wrote This "raining" part is probably what paved/unpaved is about: The surface of a paved road should not change when it's raining and your vehicle will not be covered with dirt when traveling on a paved road while it is raining (at least not from dirt which was part of the surface).
Do you agree on that (last sentence)?
Gerd
_______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
_______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
I don't see the point of that example. It's a place in the countryside, so people going there is probably aware they may need to travel over a track. Anyway, there's a paved road that leads you only 220 m away from Las Lomas, so you'll probably be able to reach the place even if unpaved roads are disabled in the GPS. I'm sorry, but I don't see the need to mark unpaved ways as paved. El 08/02/17 a las 12:27, Nuno Pedrosa escribió:
Ok. But that will mean that in a generic map, a lot of places will be unroutable if the GPS is avoiding all unpaved roads. To reach them, the user will need to allow unpaved roads in the route. This will mean routing through sand roads and gravel roads alike. It would be great if the GPS could handle semi-paved roads, as was mentioned, but it can't.
In a generic map, what will be most important? To reach the destination, or to avoid getting dirt in the car? In Cadiz, Finca Las Lomas, s/n, 11179 Vejer de la Frontera, Cádiz, Spain, would be mostly unreachable if avoiding gravel roads. https://www.google.pt/maps/place/Escuelas+Profesionales+de+la+Sagrada+Familia+Nuestra+Señora+del+Buen+Consejo+de+las+Lomas/@36.2938403,-5.8821947,17z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m5!3m4!1s0xd0c5074acf746b9:0x32a4ea0ba5f0c3d!8m2!3d36.293836!4d-5.880006 <https://www.google.pt/maps/place/Escuelas+Profesionales+de+la+Sagrada+Familia+Nuestra+Se%C3%B1ora+del+Buen+Consejo+de+las+Lomas/@36.2938403,-5.8821947,17z/data=%213m1%214b1%214m5%213m4%211s0xd0c5074acf746b9:0x32a4ea0ba5f0c3d%218m2%213d36.293836%214d-5.880006> There are lots of places like this.
A side-thought: paved roads aren’t always the best option for a given region. They are more expensive to build and when they degrade, they get “hard holes”(*) and fixing them up will usually create bumps in every hole. If the traffic is low, gravel roads will probably be a better option and better yet if rain is uncommon, as is the case in southern Europe.
Nuno Pedrosa
(*) by “hard holes”, I mean pot-holes where the edges are very steep and the wheels will crash into it. Gravel roads tend to create pot-holes with soft edges, a lot easier to drive over.
On 7 Feb 2017, at 11:39, Carlos Dávila <cdavilam@orangecorreo.es <mailto:cdavilam@orangecorreo.es>> wrote:
I don't agree with you. I think default style is a generic style, and as such, it shouldn't do much guess but use the strict meaning of tags. Gravel, fine_gravel, ice, etc. are strictly unpaved and I would mark them as such in default style. More specific uses (mtb/race bicycle/4wd...) require specific maps and thus specific styles. @Mark: I'm also cyclist and for mtb use your "raining" point of view of paved/unpaved is important to be considered.
El 07/02/17 a las 11:57, Nuno Pedrosa escribió:
Hi! In Portugal, Spain and surely a little all around, unpaved gravel roads are common, even on urban neighbourhoods. These are quite drivable and they will often be the only way to get to some places. They are also suitable to all vehicles, even if they will get covered in dirt. There are also a lot of paths going through sand (forest roads) and these will unsuitable to most vehicles (even a lot of 4x4s), regardless of their width.
I find that while driving, the real issue will be the road conditions and width. Will the unpaved road be wide enough for a car or light truck? Will it have deep tracks due to soil erosion? Will the surface be solid enough to drive in a regular car?
So, in real world GPS usage, I would like unpaved to mean “narrow, earth roads”, while paved would mean any road suitable to all regular vehicles. Example: due to wind farms being built in a lot of hill ranges, large, unpaved roads were built. These are gravel, wide roads, and often are a better option to the paved, sinuous mountain roads that go around every nook and cranny in the valleys.
So, I think that fine_gravel, salt and ice should still be “paved”.
Nuno Pedrosa.
PS: Sorry to “butt in” the talk. I’m usually silent in this list, though I read most of the discussions. Your work is amazing and I find that I can add little to what is being discussed, so I try to keep my “noise” to a minimum!
On 7 Feb 2017, at 09:40, lig fietser <ligfietser@hotmail.com <mailto:ligfietser@hotmail.com><mailto:ligfietser@hotmail.com>> wrote:
I'd call that semi-paved but Garmin doesn't have such category unfortunately. Since the default style main focus is on motor vehicles I'd suggest to add surfaces like fine_gravel, salt, ice to the unpaved list. And please add soil to it, it seems a quite popular tag.
------------------------------------------------------------------------ Gerd wrote This "raining" part is probably what paved/unpaved is about: The surface of a paved road should not change when it's raining and your vehicle will not be covered with dirt when traveling on a paved road while it is raining (at least not from dirt which was part of the surface).
Do you agree on that (last sentence)?
Gerd
Carlos, I see your point. Thank you, Nuno Pedrosa.
On 8 Feb 2017, at 12:15, Carlos Dávila <cdavilam@orangecorreo.es> wrote:
I don't see the point of that example. It's a place in the countryside, so people going there is probably aware they may need to travel over a track. Anyway, there's a paved road that leads you only 220 m away from Las Lomas, so you'll probably be able to reach the place even if unpaved roads are disabled in the GPS. I'm sorry, but I don't see the need to mark unpaved ways as paved.
El 08/02/17 a las 12:27, Nuno Pedrosa escribió:
Ok. But that will mean that in a generic map, a lot of places will be unroutable if the GPS is avoiding all unpaved roads. To reach them, the user will need to allow unpaved roads in the route. This will mean routing through sand roads and gravel roads alike. It would be great if the GPS could handle semi-paved roads, as was mentioned, but it can't.
In a generic map, what will be most important? To reach the destination, or to avoid getting dirt in the car? In Cadiz, Finca Las Lomas, s/n, 11179 Vejer de la Frontera, Cádiz, Spain, would be mostly unreachable if avoiding gravel roads. https://www.google.pt/maps/place/Escuelas+Profesionales+de+la+Sagrada+Familia+Nuestra+Señora+del+Buen+Consejo+de+las+Lomas/@36.2938403,-5.8821947,17z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m5!3m4!1s0xd0c5074acf746b9:0x32a4ea0ba5f0c3d!8m2!3d36.293836!4d-5.880006 <https://www.google.pt/maps/place/Escuelas+Profesionales+de+la+Sagrada+Familia+Nuestra+Se%C3%B1ora+del+Buen+Consejo+de+las+Lomas/@36.2938403,-5.8821947,17z/data=%213m1%214b1%214m5%213m4%211s0xd0c5074acf746b9:0x32a4ea0ba5f0c3d%218m2%213d36.293836%214d-5.880006> There are lots of places like this.
A side-thought: paved roads aren’t always the best option for a given region. They are more expensive to build and when they degrade, they get “hard holes”(*) and fixing them up will usually create bumps in every hole. If the traffic is low, gravel roads will probably be a better option and better yet if rain is uncommon, as is the case in southern Europe.
Nuno Pedrosa
(*) by “hard holes”, I mean pot-holes where the edges are very steep and the wheels will crash into it. Gravel roads tend to create pot-holes with soft edges, a lot easier to drive over.
On 7 Feb 2017, at 11:39, Carlos Dávila <cdavilam@orangecorreo.es <mailto:cdavilam@orangecorreo.es>> wrote:
I don't agree with you. I think default style is a generic style, and as such, it shouldn't do much guess but use the strict meaning of tags. Gravel, fine_gravel, ice, etc. are strictly unpaved and I would mark them as such in default style. More specific uses (mtb/race bicycle/4wd...) require specific maps and thus specific styles. @Mark: I'm also cyclist and for mtb use your "raining" point of view of paved/unpaved is important to be considered.
El 07/02/17 a las 11:57, Nuno Pedrosa escribió:
Hi! In Portugal, Spain and surely a little all around, unpaved gravel roads are common, even on urban neighbourhoods. These are quite drivable and they will often be the only way to get to some places. They are also suitable to all vehicles, even if they will get covered in dirt. There are also a lot of paths going through sand (forest roads) and these will unsuitable to most vehicles (even a lot of 4x4s), regardless of their width.
I find that while driving, the real issue will be the road conditions and width. Will the unpaved road be wide enough for a car or light truck? Will it have deep tracks due to soil erosion? Will the surface be solid enough to drive in a regular car?
So, in real world GPS usage, I would like unpaved to mean “narrow, earth roads”, while paved would mean any road suitable to all regular vehicles. Example: due to wind farms being built in a lot of hill ranges, large, unpaved roads were built. These are gravel, wide roads, and often are a better option to the paved, sinuous mountain roads that go around every nook and cranny in the valleys.
So, I think that fine_gravel, salt and ice should still be “paved”.
Nuno Pedrosa.
PS: Sorry to “butt in” the talk. I’m usually silent in this list, though I read most of the discussions. Your work is amazing and I find that I can add little to what is being discussed, so I try to keep my “noise” to a minimum!
On 7 Feb 2017, at 09:40, lig fietser <ligfietser@hotmail.com <mailto:ligfietser@hotmail.com><mailto:ligfietser@hotmail.com>> wrote:
I'd call that semi-paved but Garmin doesn't have such category unfortunately. Since the default style main focus is on motor vehicles I'd suggest to add surfaces like fine_gravel, salt, ice to the unpaved list. And please add soil to it, it seems a quite popular tag.
------------------------------------------------------------------------ Gerd wrote This "raining" part is probably what paved/unpaved is about: The surface of a paved road should not change when it's raining and your vehicle will not be covered with dirt when traveling on a paved road while it is raining (at least not from dirt which was part of the surface).
Do you agree on that (last sentence)?
Gerd
_______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
participants (7)
-
Carlos Dávila -
Dave Swarthout -
Gerd Petermann -
Gerd Petermann
-
Greg Troxel -
lig fietser -
Nuno Pedrosa