[mkgmap-dev] unpaved roads

Wed Feb 8 12:15:26 GMT 2017

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 at orangecorreo.es 
>> <mailto:cdavilam at 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 at hotmail.com 
>>>> <mailto:ligfietser at hotmail.com><mailto:ligfietser at 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