Re: [Talk-GB] Road refs
0> In article <1535573378846-0.p...@n8.nabble.com>,
0> Richard Fairhurst mailto:rich...@systemed.net> ("Richard") wrote:
Richard> Toby Speight wrote:
>> That's why we have
>> rendering rules - if you don't like the rendering, change the rules.
Richard> What you're suggesting would imply that every worldwide site using
Richard> OSM data to display a consumer-facing map, or provide routing,
Richard> needs to write a special exception for Great Britain. With the
Richard> best will in the world, that doesn't and isn't going to happen. (I
Richard> think only one such site does so, and it's the one I run!)
Yeah, it seems that most don't make use of country-level tags, and
that's unfortunate: it leads to the situation we have now where every
mini-roundabout also has to have a "direction" tag instead of the router
just reading a country-level tag (hypothetically, "drives_on=left").
I guess the problem is that the API doesn't return enclosing areas like
it returns containing relations, so it's harder to see from a tile what
adminstrative region it's in.
Richard> Dave's edit (minutiae about highway_authority_ref vs
Richard> unsigned_ref vs official_ref aside[1]) brings this country into
Richard> line with how most of the rest of the world does it: the ref=
Richard> tag is for signposted references. See how
Richard> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:ref#Examples_on_ways
Richard> refers to "on the ground", "on the signs", "the usage on the
Richard> signs".
That text appears to be talking about whether refs include spaces or
hyphens, not whether to use ref or another tag (if there is another tag
that's understood worldwide, then it makes sense to do the same - but it
should be listed with Key:ref on the tag wiki so it can be found).
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Road refs
All "ref" values are relative to some authority who is responsible for
maintaining the list. The "A1" in ref=A1 is not unique unless you
specify that (for example) the UK Department for Transport issued that
value. A C-number is still a valid ref, but the maintainer of the list
is a local council. Even within the UK there are duplicates by the way -
Northern Ireland has its own set of road numbers which often duplicate
numbers in GB. So we can't say that a plain "ref=*" is nationally unique
either.
Assuming the formal definition of "ref" is "the value in some
administration" and not "the value on the sign", the proper fix is to
change all ref=* to ref:XXX=* where XXX represents the issuing
authority. Alternatively keep ref=* and add authority:ref=XXX. Using
source:ref is no good because that represents how you found out, and may
be something like source:ref=sign.
If we define "ref" as "the value on the sign" it should be
"signed_road_number" or something, not "ref" as this implies a
referential relationship with some other entity.
On 2018-08-30 01:57, Dave F wrote:
> On 29/08/2018 20:32, Toby Speight wrote:
>
>> I consider it a "niche" that wants them hidden.
>
> The vast, vast majority are hidden on the ground.
>
>> I don't see
>> that we have to mis-tag them all to have them hidden - I can see it
>> would be useful to have a map with less clutter, but it shouldn't be
>> hard to do that without having to mangle the underlying OSM database!
>
> Separating tags isn't "mangling" It makes the database more detailed &
> accurate.
>
> How would you propose to do it?
>
>> Yes, I appreciate that if the highways_authority_ref were documented and
>> somehow agreed to be correct, then for mkgmap it would be a simple
>> matter of "add ref ${highways_authority_ref};" near the beginning; it
>> would be a bit harder to get a workable tag template for Merkaartor, but
>> tools like KeepRight and Geofabrik QA aren't so easily adjusted, and
>> unlikely to adopt new tagging until it's at least documented.
>
> I'm sorry, but this is poppycock. All data users should have ability to
> responded to changes in the database. The tail does not wag the dog.
>
> DaveF
>
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Road refs
On 29/08/2018 20:32, Toby Speight wrote:
I consider it a "niche" that wants them hidden.
The vast, vast majority are hidden on the ground.
I don't see
that we have to mis-tag them all to have them hidden - I can see it
would be useful to have a map with less clutter, but it shouldn't be
hard to do that without having to mangle the underlying OSM database!
Separating tags isn't "mangling" It makes the database more detailed &
accurate.
How would you propose to do it?
Yes, I appreciate that if the highways_authority_ref were documented and
somehow agreed to be correct, then for mkgmap it would be a simple
matter of "add ref ${highways_authority_ref};" near the beginning; it
would be a bit harder to get a workable tag template for Merkaartor, but
tools like KeepRight and Geofabrik QA aren't so easily adjusted, and
unlikely to adopt new tagging until it's at least documented.
I'm sorry, but this is poppycock. All data users should have ability to
responded to changes in the database. The tail does not wag the dog.
DaveF
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Road refs
On 29/08/2018 20:44, Toby Speight wrote:
0> In article ,
0> Dave F. mailto:davefoxfa...@btinternet.com> ("Dave") wrote:
Dave> Point about OSM wiki: IMO giving multiple options for the same
Dave> entity leads to confusion & errors so should be avoided.
That's exactly what's problematic about "highways_authority_ref": it
creates a tag that contains the same information as belongs in "ref".
Based on the name, the similarity to ncn_ref and the like suggests a
non-authoritative alternative identifier.
Hi Toby
Let's deal with the last point first. Unsure how you could describe
'highways_authority_ref' as 'non-authoritative'.
'ncn_ref' isn't 'non-authoritative' or similar to it's a label given to
an assigned highway by Sustrans, many miles of which are maintained by
local authorities.
OK, main point: 'ref' was used almost from the start of OSM when Steve
C. mapped the first ways. As the database evolved it became clear 'ref'
was too ambiguous & so other 'ref' tags evolved. Please remember there
were no focus groups meetings laying out a pathway concept. OSM is a
truly organic development. Things change, evolve. As the database
becomes more detailed so the tags become more detailed. Contributors
should be expecting change & willing to adapt. Being fearful of change
is not a reason for the status-quo.
I've used 'highways_authority_ref' as it was suggested as a more
specific tag to the alternatives. As I said in my OP I'm wiling to amend
that, but only after I've amalgamated all the relevant tags & someone
comes up with a better alternative. So far no one has done so.
Getting all contributors to use 'highway_authority_ref' will be
problematic, in *exactly* the same way it is for so many other tags.
That is *not* a reason to not improve OSM's database.
General point to all: Others here & on private email appear to think I,
& I alone, conceived this proposal. I did not. This is clearly evident
from reading the links in my OP. If anyone wishes to criticize the
proposal, please have the common decency to base it on facts & evidence.
Cheers
DaveF
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Road refs
Toby Speight wrote: > That's why we have > rendering rules - if you don't like the rendering, change the rules. What you're suggesting would imply that every worldwide site using OSM data to display a consumer-facing map, or provide routing, needs to write a special exception for Great Britain. With the best will in the world, that doesn't and isn't going to happen. (I think only one such site does so, and it's the one I run!) Dave's edit (minutiae about highway_authority_ref vs unsigned_ref vs official_ref aside[1]) brings this country into line with how most of the rest of the world does it: the ref= tag is for signposted references. See how https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:ref#Examples_on_ways refers to "on the ground", "on the signs", "the usage on the signs". Richard [1] Personally, I honestly don't mind whether it's unsigned_ref or admin_ref or official_ref or highway_authority_ref or one of the many other things that have been suggested over the years. It might be worth having the conversation here to see if there's something that people can coalesce around, and then no doubt a further edit would be possible. At that point, though, I would be tempted to bow out and redirect my energies to the intriguing question of how an entirely bogus pub appears to have survived in an allegedly well-mapped urban area for eight years. ;) https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/678796800/history -- Sent from: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Great-Britain-f5372682.html ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Road refs
0> In article ,
0> Dave F. mailto:davefoxfa...@btinternet.com> ("Dave") wrote:
Dave> Point about OSM wiki: IMO giving multiple options for the same
Dave> entity leads to confusion & errors so should be avoided.
That's exactly what's problematic about "highways_authority_ref": it
creates a tag that contains the same information as belongs in "ref".
Based on the name, the similarity to ncn_ref and the like suggests a
non-authoritative alternative identifier.
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Road refs
On 29/08/18 20:25, Toby Speight wrote: Thanks for that - it predates my joining this list. It seems to (partially) answer only my first question - it's to benefit those who don't like their rendering (on paper/screen or on a navigation device). That's why we have rendering rules - if you don't like the rendering, change the rules. Using the wrong tag for the data (especially a totally undocumented tag) to get a rendering you like is really not helpful. The people it benefits are people using OSM to navigate in vehicles, whether with routing software or with visual maps, as displaying information that doesn't exist on the ground results in their looking for signs that don't exist. I would argue that the people tagging for the renderer are those who add references that don't exist on the ground and are not actually nationally unique. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Road refs
On 29/08/2018 20:25, Toby Speight wrote: Thanks for that - it predates my joining this list. It seems to (partially) answer only my first question - it's to benefit those who don't like their rendering (on paper/screen or on a navigation device). That's why we have rendering rules - if you don't like the rendering, change the rules. Using the wrong tag for the data (especially a totally undocumented tag) to get a rendering you like is really not helpful. How would you suggest that data is tagged so that a renderer or a router knows the true local situation, e.g. "This reference tag, B1363, appears on signs is nationally unique and is something that drivers can use as a reference, but this other reference tag, C91, doesn't appear on signs, is unique only to the local authority that issued it, and can't be used for navigation"? It's not as simple as saying "all B road refs and signed and all C road refs are unsigned" - there are quite a few exceptions. Best Regards, Andy ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Road refs
0> In article <1535456684095-0.p...@n8.nabble.com>,
0> Richard Fairhurst mailto:rich...@systemed.net> ("Richard") wrote:
Richard> Toby Speight wrote:
>> Who is responsible for coordinating the related changes to software -
>> editors, renderers, converters and QA tools - that are required? I
>> see no sign of any of this having started.
Richard> No changes are required to core OSM software, but if your own
Richard> niche requires a map on which C-road refs are displayed (and I
Richard> recognise you from the SABRE forums, so I guess that might be
Richard> the case ;) ) I'd be more than happy to help you and/or others
Richard> set up a server to do that. I'm sure there are other people
Richard> here who'd extend the same offer of help.
Interesting that you say there's a "niche" where road refs should be
displayed; I consider it a "niche" that wants them hidden. I don't see
that we have to mis-tag them all to have them hidden - I can see it
would be useful to have a map with less clutter, but it shouldn't be
hard to do that without having to mangle the underlying OSM database!
Yes, I appreciate that if the highways_authority_ref were documented and
somehow agreed to be correct, then for mkgmap it would be a simple
matter of "add ref ${highways_authority_ref};" near the beginning; it
would be a bit harder to get a workable tag template for Merkaartor, but
tools like KeepRight and Geofabrik QA aren't so easily adjusted, and
unlikely to adopt new tagging until it's at least documented.
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Road refs
0> In article
,
0> Andrew Hain mailto:andrewhain...@hotmail.co.uk> ("Andrew") wrote:
Andrew> Toby, I really think you need to read through the conversation
Andrew> archived at
Andrew>
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2018-August/thread.html
Andrew> and answer the points discussed there.
Thanks for that - it predates my joining this list. It seems to (partially)
answer only my first question - it's to benefit those who don't like their
rendering (on paper/screen or on a navigation device). That's why we have
rendering rules - if you don't like the rendering, change the rules. Using
the wrong tag for the data (especially a totally undocumented tag) to get a
rendering you like is really not helpful.
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Road refs
On 28/08/18 12:54, webmas...@killyfole.org.uk wrote: The objection is that you are undoing the effort and time spent by mappers The data has not been destroyed, just more correctly tagged. In general most of this information can only be obtained from armchairs, so it is irrelevant as to whether or not the mapper is in the area. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Road refs
Toby Speight wrote: > Who is responsible for coordinating the related changes to software - > editors, renderers, converters and QA tools - that are required? I > see no sign of any of this having started. No changes are required to core OSM software, but if your own niche requires a map on which C-road refs are displayed (and I recognise you from the SABRE forums, so I guess that might be the case ;) ) I'd be more than happy to help you and/or others set up a server to do that. I'm sure there are other people here who'd extend the same offer of help. Richard -- Sent from: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Great-Britain-f5372682.html ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Road refs
Hi Toby You've been given the link to the previous discussions, which explains the reasons. What is your objection to the reasons given for this amendment? The wiki is a guide, not the law. It hasn't been updated yet as you & others still wish to discuss the situation. If it had, I suspect there would have been complaints that it was amended before being discussed (even though it has). It's the responsibility of the creators of the software to ensure they keep up to date with the ever changing database. Cheers DaveF On 27/08/2018 19:15, Toby Speight wrote: Recently, all the tertiary roads in my region had their ref tags removed, and replaced with "highways_authority_ref". A week later the unclassified and residential roads suffered similar attack. * Who is supposed to benefit from hiding these data? * Who is responsible for documenting what this tag means, and when it should be used in place of the standard tagging? So far, there's no mention of it on its own tag wiki, nor on key:ref * Who is responsible for coordinating the related changes to software - editors, renderers, converters and QA tools - that are required? I see no sign of any of this having started. In short, what's going on, what's wrong with the standard tagging, and how can we get the data back where they belong? ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Road refs
Hi Adam On 28/08/2018 08:35, Adam Snape wrote: The UK tagging guidelines have always advised against using the ref tag: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_Tagging_Guidelines although you'll notice from that there's still no overall agreement on exactly which other tag to use for unsigned references. I do believe this should have been discussed before the mechanical edit. It was discussed back in '15. Some felt the two listed were specific enough with another option put forward, which I'm currently using. I indicated in my OP that that was up for discussion. Please start the ball rolling if you have objections to highway_authority_ref. Point about OSM wiki: IMO giving multiple options for the same entity leads to confusion & errors so should be avoided. Cheers DaveF ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Road refs
Hi Tony, Please do read the conversation, but I think it's important to stress that no one is changing the standard tagging here. It has never been standard to map unsigned references for tertiary/unclassified roads under the ref tag; indeed there has long been a consensus against doing so. The UK tagging guidelines have always advised against using the ref tag: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_Tagging_Guidelines although you'll notice from that there's still no overall agreement on exactly which other tag to use for unsigned references. I do believe this should have been discussed before the mechanical edit. As a reminder, if you are adding unsigned references you do need to make sure that you're using an acceptable source which doesn't infringe council copyright. ie. a source that is released under a public licence such as the Open Government Licence or one which we have explicit permission to include in OSM and release under the ODBL. Kind regards Adam On Mon, 27 Aug 2018, 19:16 Toby Speight, wrote: > Recently, all the tertiary roads in my region had their ref tags > removed, and replaced with "highways_authority_ref". A week later the > unclassified and residential roads suffered similar attack. > > * Who is supposed to benefit from hiding these data? > * Who is responsible for documenting what this tag means, and when it > should be used in place of the standard tagging? So far, there's no > mention of it on its own tag wiki, nor on key:ref > * Who is responsible for coordinating the related changes to software - > editors, renderers, converters and QA tools - that are required? I > see no sign of any of this having started. > > In short, what's going on, what's wrong with the standard tagging, and > how can we get the data back where they belong? > > ___ > Talk-GB mailing list > Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb > On 27 Aug 2018 19:16, "Toby Speight" wrote: Recently, all the tertiary roads in my region had their ref tags removed, and replaced with "highways_authority_ref". A week later the unclassified and residential roads suffered similar attack. * Who is supposed to benefit from hiding these data? * Who is responsible for documenting what this tag means, and when it should be used in place of the standard tagging? So far, there's no mention of it on its own tag wiki, nor on key:ref * Who is responsible for coordinating the related changes to software - editors, renderers, converters and QA tools - that are required? I see no sign of any of this having started. In short, what's going on, what's wrong with the standard tagging, and how can we get the data back where they belong? ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Road refs
Toby, I really think you need to read through the conversation archived at https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2018-August/thread.html and answer the points discussed there. --<https://www.mail-archive.com/talk-gb@openstreetmap.org/> Andrew From: Toby Speight Sent: 27 August 2018 19:15 To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org Subject: [Talk-GB] Road refs Recently, all the tertiary roads in my region had their ref tags removed, and replaced with "highways_authority_ref". A week later the unclassified and residential roads suffered similar attack. * Who is supposed to benefit from hiding these data? * Who is responsible for documenting what this tag means, and when it should be used in place of the standard tagging? So far, there's no mention of it on its own tag wiki, nor on key:ref * Who is responsible for coordinating the related changes to software - editors, renderers, converters and QA tools - that are required? I see no sign of any of this having started. In short, what's going on, what's wrong with the standard tagging, and how can we get the data back where they belong? ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] Road refs
Recently, all the tertiary roads in my region had their ref tags removed, and replaced with "highways_authority_ref". A week later the unclassified and residential roads suffered similar attack. * Who is supposed to benefit from hiding these data? * Who is responsible for documenting what this tag means, and when it should be used in place of the standard tagging? So far, there's no mention of it on its own tag wiki, nor on key:ref * Who is responsible for coordinating the related changes to software - editors, renderers, converters and QA tools - that are required? I see no sign of any of this having started. In short, what's going on, what's wrong with the standard tagging, and how can we get the data back where they belong? ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
