[Patch] Add tagging template for key "smoothness"

[Bernhard Hiller <bhil@…>]

The key "smoothness" is described in ​http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:smoothness. It is not yet (as of version 4279) available among the templates in JOSM.

[simon04]

According to the Wiki page, the usage of this tag is discussed controversially. The internal presets already contain the tag surface, which has similar meaning.

Thus, I personally vote against adding smoothness to the presets.

[Bernhard Hiller <bhil@…>]

Replying to simon04:
"surface=asphalt" can mean anything between the surface of a newly built motorway and a rotten potholed road.
Since "surface", "tracktype", and "smoothness" are not at all unified (yet), this tag is (still) useful.

[Bernhard Hiller <bhil@…>]

Please find enclosed my changes to defaultpresets.xml. Hope this is the correct position for adding a new se, at least it works when I debug the program.
I found that for "highway=track" the surface-collection was smaller than for other ways; I changed that, too.

[bhil@…]

Patch for internal presets

[simon04]

patch as patch for easier reviewing

[bastiK]

Replying to simon04:

Thus, I personally vote against adding smoothness to the presets.

+1

Some people may have the urge to fill in the preset form completely. So it looks like it is somehow mandatory to specify a smoothness value for each highway. We could place it somewhere less prominent, possible in a ​user preset.

In addition, the plain values are misleading - you need the full definition to tag it properly. One can use display_values like for SAC scale.

[przemas75]

There are quite a lot of smoothness tag in the database, are you still oppose this tag in JOSM?

[bastiK]

I've asked for opinions on the tagging mailing list:

​https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2014-August/019193.html

[bastiK]

This seems to be the sentiment shared by most:

Mateusz on ​Tagging:

I use smoothness and I would welcome it in JOSM. I am not really happy
about it, but I was unable to invent something better and it
not as bad as say maxspeed:practical.

smoothness=* is supported in iD: ​https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2014-August/019197.html

Overall I would revise my opinion from 3 years ago and vote for the inclusion of this tag.

[Klumbumbus]

In 8028/josm:

fix #6881 - add smoothness combos to presets. (descriptions from ​https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/blob/master/data/presets/fields/smoothness.json)

[bastiK]

Thanks!

[anonymous]

Can these strings have context for translation please? They already clash with the same values for path visibility.

[Klumbumbus]

In 8039/josm:

see #6881 - allow smoothness parking combination in validator

[Klumbumbus]

Replying to anonymous:

Can these strings have context for translation please? They already clash with the same values for path visibility.

trail_visibility already has a translation context, so they are handled separately.

#. item "Ways/Path" combo "Visibility" display value
#: build/trans_presets.java:875
msgctxt "trail_visibility"
msgid "excellent"
msgstr "exzellent"

...

#. item  combo "Smoothness" entry "excellent" display value
#: build/trans_presets.java:21
msgid "excellent"
msgstr ""

[aceman]

Ok, thanks.