Re: [talk-au] highway=service

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

On Sun, 15 Aug 2021 at 10:35, Tom Brennan  wrote:

>
> The parking aisle page on the wiki:
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:service%3Dparking_aisle
> states one of the exclusions as:
> "Forms the "trunk" or perimeter of the parking lot, connecting multiple
> parking aisles – use highway=service without service=* instead. There
> may be parking spaces on either side, but the roadway's primary purpose
> is to get drivers to another part of the parking lot."
>

I'd disagree with the wiki there, & say that the perimeter road should be
service=driveway

So if you go by the wiki, the presence of parking spaces doesn't not
> automatically make it a parking aisle.


I'd say yes it does.

But I certainly wouldn't split ways, and I'm fairly happy with the
> tagging/presentation.


Yep.

You could probably also mount an argument to map
> the circumference as highway=service without service=parking_aisle


Appear to be parking bays directly off it so i'd call that parking

These ones are all highway=service + service=parking_aisle. But I'm
> happy again with the tagging/presentation.
>

You "could" split them into a driveway in / out, with the rest as parking,
but not much point

Here's one where most of the internal ways are parking aisle, but one
> small section is not. This seems pointless to me.
>

Yes, pretty pointless but if you wanted to be pedantic, it's probably
right. If you really wanted to, you could also make a short section of
driveway up to the separate section of parking at 11 o'clock, & also for
the curve linking that area back to the main park, but definitely no need
to.

And this one definitely should be inverted:
>

Yep!

So I reckon the moral of this story is that if you think it makes sense to
do it "this" way, then it probably does, & that's probably good enough!

Thanks

Graeme
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] highway=service

[Tom Brennan]

On 14/08/2021 6:25 pm, Warin wrote:

On 14/8/21 4:45 pm, Michael Collinson wrote:

    3. parking areas
    This one can also be a bit confusing - following the wiki, some
    of these
    end up being service=parking_aisle, but others are without
    service=* eg:
    https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit#map=19/-33.80928/151.20897
    
    I imagine you can do in theory do an area query to establish
    highway=service within amenity=parking, but this does seem clunky!
    And not that we should be mapping for the renderer, but the
    rendering
    also seems inconsistent:
    https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/-33.80939/151.20923
    

If you can turn from the way directly into a parking spot, then it 
should be parking aisle, so that one I think should be parking aisle.


Slightly different view here. I find that most car parks have 
"arterial" ways for ingress/exit, navigation within larger parks, and 
sometimes very local through "destination" traffic; obvious from 
design or width. I don't put a parking_aisle on these. I think leads 
to better map presentation and routing. In Melbourne, I find that many 
car park service roads double up as useful bicycle connectors.


At least some of those "arterial" ways also have parking alongside them. 
I would still mark those as parking aisle. Where there is not adjacent 
parking then 'unclassified' would be my choice.

This comes down to what the purpose of the service=parking_aisle tag is.

Is it to distinguish major vs minor roads within a parking area - 
because that's how it's handled by renderers and routers - or to say 
where to find parking within a parking area.


I'm probably more with Michael Collinson on this one.

The parking aisle page on the wiki:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:service%3Dparking_aisle
states one of the exclusions as:
"Forms the "trunk" or perimeter of the parking lot, connecting multiple 
parking aisles – use highway=service without service=* instead. There 
may be parking spaces on either side, but the roadway's primary purpose 
is to get drivers to another part of the parking lot."


So if you go by the wiki, the presence of parking spaces doesn't not 
automatically make it a parking aisle. It's about what you consider the 
way's primary purpose is.


Here's an example of a classic trunk/spoke parking lot that has sections 
of ways that are not parking_aisle:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit#map=19/-33.83561/151.06817
eg
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/368622450
But I certainly wouldn't split ways, and I'm fairly happy with the 
tagging/presentation. You could probably also mount an argument to map 
the circumference as highway=service without service=parking_aisle, but 
that's probably where the subjectivity comes in.


These ones are all highway=service + service=parking_aisle. But I'm 
happy again with the tagging/presentation.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit#map=19/-33.83906/151.07297

Here's one where most of the internal ways are parking aisle, but one 
small section is not. This seems pointless to me.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit#map=19/-33.81030/151.00033

And this one definitely should be inverted:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit#map=19/-33.85421/151.06761

cheers
Tom

Canyoning? try http://ozultimate.com/canyoning
Bushwalking? try http://bushwalkingnsw.com

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] highway=service

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

On Sun, 15 Aug 2021 at 08:55, Tom Brennan  wrote:

>
> This is an example of a residential driveway (highway=service +
> service=driveway) that I would add access=private to.


Yep.

I agree with your comment about only the section inside the property
> actually being
> private, but that distinction really only becomes important once
> footpaths are more frequently mapped as highway=footway + footway=sidewalk
>

Personally, I don't bother splitting them. Strictly speaking, nobody is
allowed to turn into your household driveway & park there, so I consider
that the whole thing would be private?

This is an example of an industrial complex that has driveways (or
> access roads?) leading to numerous small businesses. Currently
> highway=service, no access or service tags. Access is not clear to me
>

I'd call it =driveway + access=yes, as customers have to get to those
businesses

This is an example of an industrial area driveway (highway=service +
> service=driveway) that I would add access=private to (local knowledge).
>

Is it only PO staff who drive in there? If yes, then =private is good, if
other couriers / deliveries also come in, then possibly =permit?

This is an example of an industrial complex that has a mix (6 ways
> total) of highway=service, highway=service + service=parking_aisle and
> highway=service + service=driveway(!).


Yep, that looks about right, once again probably access=yes. You could also
include another driveway going up to the multi-story carpark, & a
parking-aisle on it's roof! Access on that one would depend on signage
though?

https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit#map=19/-33.81513/151.19230

Thanks

Graeme
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

[talk-au] Future of maps?

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

Interesting article I just spotted & thought I'd share

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-08-15/paper-maps-have-a-future-says-cartographer-anthony-stephens/100303036

So, Miami is north of us - how about you? :-)

Thanks

Graeme
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] highway=service

[Tom Brennan]

On 14/08/2021 11:59 am, Andrew Harvey wrote:

2. driveways (private property) -> service=driveway + access=private
This seems pretty clear cut in residential areas. It also seems fairly
clear for small business/industrial property that are for
employees/business vehicles only.

Where it gets a bit confusing is if the driveway is to something else.
For example, in the Willoughby area, there are many industrial complexes
which have "driveways". But if it leads to parking (amenity=parking?),
is it still a driveway, or is it just highway=service without service=*.
The access=* issues also interplays with this - because in larger
industrial complexes there may be a mix of access=private and
access=customers.



Can you post examples? In my opinion, a good rule of thumb for driveway is
where you need to turn off the road and cross the footpath. I realise it's
not always clear though.

Technically only the section inside the front fence is private, the section
between the footpath and road is public but I've never mapped to this level
of detail.


This is an example of a residential driveway (highway=service + 
service=driveway) that I would add access=private to. I agree with your 
comment about only the section inside the property actually being 
private, but that distinction really only becomes important once 
footpaths are more frequently mapped as highway=footway + footway=sidewalk

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/448093794

This is an example of an industrial complex that has driveways (or 
access roads?) leading to numerous small businesses. Currently 
highway=service, no access or service tags. Access is not clear to me

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/778526062

This is an example of an industrial area driveway (highway=service + 
service=driveway) that I would add access=private to (local knowledge).

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/893221380

This is an example of an industrial complex that has a mix (6 ways 
total) of highway=service, highway=service + service=parking_aisle and 
highway=service + service=driveway(!). Signs at the gate describe it as 
a "road-related area" which I believe means that it is accessible by the 
public - though I don't think that necessarily extends to any parking.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit#map=19/-33.81625/151.19273

cheers
Tom

Canyoning? try http://ozultimate.com/canyoning
Bushwalking? try http://bushwalkingnsw.com

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] highway=service

[Warin]

On 14/8/21 4:45 pm, Michael Collinson wrote:

I've added my comments below Andrew's. Hope that is not too messy.  /Mike

On 2021-08-14 03:59, Andrew Harvey wrote:



On Sat, 14 Aug 2021 at 09:12, Tom Brennan > wrote:


Like my previous post on sidewalks, this one is also from walking
and
cycling all of the streets of my LGA (Willoughby). The other area
where
tagging seems to me to be a bit messy is:

highway=service

This messiness may be more of a general OSM issue than
specifically an
Australian one!

Where possible I've been trying to add a service=? tag to define
these
better, in line with the relevant pages on the wiki. In my area, the
majority of these seem to be:

1. laneways between houses -> service=alley
For me these are part of the official road network, but in
Willoughby
they are normally narrow, and lead to/past people's garages. This
one
seems relatively clear cut - and also appears to be the only
service tag
that does relate to the official road network(?)


Yeah I'd agree, but these are part of the public road network, they 
are just lesser importance roads because they are mostly for access 
to the rear of houses.
+1.  And in the US and northern UK may be poorly maintained, cobbled, 
temporarily obstructed etc, a good flag to routers.




In Willoughby and other parts of Australia these may have been for 
'night soil service' where the man came to empty the outhouse.


They mostly were council property .. some have been converted into 
private property.


Some have no known owner! The council does not want to proceed to court 
for back rates as then they would take possession and be liable for 
maintenance.





2. driveways (private property) -> service=driveway + access=private
This seems pretty clear cut in residential areas. It also seems
fairly
clear for small business/industrial property that are for
employees/business vehicles only.

Where it gets a bit confusing is if the driveway is to something
else.
For example, in the Willoughby area, there are many industrial
complexes
which have "driveways". But if it leads to parking
(amenity=parking?),
is it still a driveway, or is it just highway=service without
service=*.
The access=* issues also interplays with this - because in larger
industrial complexes there may be a mix of access=private and
access=customers.


Can you post examples? In my opinion, a good rule of thumb for 
driveway is where you need to turn off the road and cross the 
footpath. I realise it's not always clear though.


Example Way: 558245891. Some of these can be 'open to customers', 
otherwise private. Personally I would not tag them unless I knew, and 
even then it can change with new tenants.



Technically only the section inside the front fence is private, the 
section between the footpath and road is public but I've never mapped 
to this level of detail.


Personally, I ONLY use driveway for residential driveways. I feel 
using it for anything else is confusing and adds no value - despite 
what Map Features says. Like Andrew, I rarely split the sections into 
private and public sections but it IS useful for foot and wheelchair 
routing.



3. parking areas
This one can also be a bit confusing - following the wiki, some
of these
end up being service=parking_aisle, but others are without
service=* eg:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit#map=19/-33.80928/151.20897

I imagine you can do in theory do an area query to establish
highway=service within amenity=parking, but this does seem clunky!
And not that we should be mapping for the renderer, but the
rendering
also seems inconsistent:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/-33.80939/151.20923



If you can turn from the way directly into a parking spot, then it 
should be parking aisle, so that one I think should be parking aisle.


Slightly different view here. I find that most car parks have 
"arterial" ways for ingress/exit, navigation within larger parks, and 
sometimes very local through "destination" traffic; obvious from 
design or width. I don't put a parking_aisle on these. I think leads 
to better map presentation and routing. In Melbourne, I find that many 
car park service roads double up as useful bicycle connectors.



At least some of those "arterial" ways also have parking alongside them. 
I would still mark those as parking aisle. Where there is not adjacent 
parking then 'unclassified' would be my choice.



___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] highway=service

[Michael Collinson]

I've added my comments below Andrew's. Hope that is not too messy. /Mike

On 2021-08-14 03:59, Andrew Harvey wrote:



On Sat, 14 Aug 2021 at 09:12, Tom Brennan > wrote:


Like my previous post on sidewalks, this one is also from walking and
cycling all of the streets of my LGA (Willoughby). The other area
where
tagging seems to me to be a bit messy is:

highway=service

This messiness may be more of a general OSM issue than
specifically an
Australian one!

Where possible I've been trying to add a service=? tag to define
these
better, in line with the relevant pages on the wiki. In my area, the
majority of these seem to be:

1. laneways between houses -> service=alley
For me these are part of the official road network, but in Willoughby
they are normally narrow, and lead to/past people's garages. This one
seems relatively clear cut - and also appears to be the only
service tag
that does relate to the official road network(?)


Yeah I'd agree, but these are part of the public road network, they 
are just lesser importance roads because they are mostly for access to 
the rear of houses.
+1.  And in the US and northern UK may be poorly maintained, cobbled, 
temporarily obstructed etc, a good flag to routers.



2. driveways (private property) -> service=driveway + access=private
This seems pretty clear cut in residential areas. It also seems
fairly
clear for small business/industrial property that are for
employees/business vehicles only.

Where it gets a bit confusing is if the driveway is to something
else.
For example, in the Willoughby area, there are many industrial
complexes
which have "driveways". But if it leads to parking
(amenity=parking?),
is it still a driveway, or is it just highway=service without
service=*.
The access=* issues also interplays with this - because in larger
industrial complexes there may be a mix of access=private and
access=customers.


Can you post examples? In my opinion, a good rule of thumb for 
driveway is where you need to turn off the road and cross the 
footpath. I realise it's not always clear though.
Technically only the section inside the front fence is private, the 
section between the footpath and road is public but I've never mapped 
to this level of detail.


Personally, I ONLY use driveway for residential driveways. I feel using 
it for anything else is confusing and adds no value - despite what Map 
Features says. Like Andrew, I rarely split the sections into private and 
public sections but it IS useful for foot and wheelchair routing.



3. parking areas
This one can also be a bit confusing - following the wiki, some of
these
end up being service=parking_aisle, but others are without
service=* eg:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit#map=19/-33.80928/151.20897

I imagine you can do in theory do an area query to establish
highway=service within amenity=parking, but this does seem clunky!
And not that we should be mapping for the renderer, but the rendering
also seems inconsistent:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/-33.80939/151.20923



If you can turn from the way directly into a parking spot, then it 
should be parking aisle, so that one I think should be parking aisle.


Slightly different view here. I find that most car parks have "arterial" 
ways for ingress/exit, navigation within larger parks, and sometimes 
very local through "destination" traffic; obvious from design or width. 
I don't put a parking_aisle on these. I think leads to better map 
presentation and routing. In Melbourne, I find that many car park 
service roads double up as useful bicycle connectors.
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au