On 16 May 2012, at 01:05, Jason Cunningham wrote:
On 15 May 2012 23:32, rob.j.nicker...@gmail.com wrote:
As I am not a regular cyclist I must admit that I don't pay much attention to
these signs. So my question is do Local Authorities use the cycle and foot
signs (segregated or
IMO it's better to add something clear than to shoehorn something into a
generic tag. Especially if you end up with compound values. OK so they
could be parsed, but it's just making work (both processing and
maintaining). Better to have something unambiguous like national_rail=yes
and
I doubt there are any instances in the UK where there's a TRO supporting a
No Pedestrians sign on a cycle track (welcome to be proved wrong!). The
possibility exists in the legislation, but you'd have to explicitly sign it
(the white-bike-on-blue-circle does not of itself exclude pedestrians in
AJ Ashton wrote:
We've found that the lack of familiar London Underground and
National Rail icons is a particularly strong sticking point with
people who would otherwise happily switch to OSM, which is
partly why we chose to focus on it.
Absolutely. It does look really good. :)
I guess
On 16 May 2012 01:05, Jason Cunningham jamicu...@googlemail.com wrote:
Unless it's been recently changed. the Cycle Only sign could never
prohibit 'pedestrian access' because use of the sign is defined by the
Department for Transports Traffic Signs Manual (chapter 3) [1].
The DFT
Hi
This is a general question about the current state of the maps.
When we use our commercial road networks (OS Mastermap Navteq) for road
routing we tend to assume that the roads have been analysed for
connectivity, that there are no one-way streets leading to dead ends, that
you can't turn left
Hi Tim,
I expect that you would find a good appetitie to fix any problems if we can
see that this will be highly valued (i.e. used in a great tool), and the
bug reports are simple to understand. I'll leave comments about the quality
to others, suffice to say that in the Midlands the roads and
Hi,
On 05/16/2012 11:56 AM, Tim Pigden wrote:
that there are no one-way streets leading to dead ends,
This is not common in OSM but I am not aware of anyone doing a network
analysis that would fix such a problem.
that you can't turn left off a flyover onto the road underneath
In OSM,
Richard Fairhurst wrote:
Or indeed we could just go with network=National Rail as a good
enough solution.
My issue with National Rail was that, to me, (as I explained to the
Peruvian chap who's edited Mansfield Woodhouse station):
National Rail means these people:
On Wed, 2012-05-16 at 13:42 +0200, Frederik Ramm wrote:
Appetite, yes, but you can also easily chase people away if your system
detects too many things where people don't think it's a bug at all, so
some tuning might be necessary. One of the weaknesses of most of the
existing systems (with
AJ Ashton wrote:
.. and apparently we messed up.
...
AJ @ MapBox
Sorry, but who's we here? Is it a bunch of people at some other
mailing list/forum, or who work for Mapbox, or something else?
Last night I spotted changes from someone (I think*) from Peru, and (I
think) from the US -
On 12/05/12 13:02, Philip Barnes wrote:
They do vary between highway authorities, but well worth getting some
photos of samples. The one thing waymarks have in common, and I can only
claim knowledge of England and Wales here is that a public footpath has
yellow arrows, public bridleways have
National Rail is what ATOC came up with to describe things that are
represented by the double-arrow symbol, and which would formerly have been
referred to as British Rail or informally as the rail network. (The staff
refer to it as the railway, but that's another subject)
National Rail isn't a
Andrew Chadwick wrote:
Not a waymarker, but the signposts are fairly rare too; Public Byway
or just Byway is the normal wording
FWIW Derbyshire seem to have started (within the last 3 months or so)
using Byway Open to All Traffic in full on signs.
Cheers,
Andy
As noted there are some tools available to help find potential errors that
effect routing. Have a look on the QA page [1], specifically at keepright,
OSM Inspector and MapDust. As for editing OSM and proposing new tags,
OpenStreetMap works a bit like wikipedia - we have a very flat structure
On 16/05/12 04:35, AJ Ashton wrote:
Hi Richard everyone,
This started off simply as an effort to improve our display London
Underground stations using existing OSM data, but was scope-creeped
into much more and apparently we messed up.
We've found that the lack of familiar London Underground
On 16 May 2012 12:42, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
On 05/16/2012 11:56 AM, Tim Pigden wrote:
that there are no one-way streets leading to dead ends,
This is not common in OSM but I am not aware of anyone doing a network
analysis that would fix such a problem.
Keepright has this
I don't think the email below made it to the list:
On , Tim Pigden tim.pig...@optrak.com wrote:
Error reporting would definitely be a challenge.Are there existing
facilities to add suspect type tags to enable OSM itself to be the primary
reporting medium? I haven't looked into the details of
Thanks for the explanations of the complicated 'network' situation.
Richard Fairhurst wrote:
It may lend itself to an ncn/rcn/lcn or nwn/rwn/lwn solution, ...
I'm tempted to suggest a generic tag for any country's national railway system
(mainline=yes|no or somesuch), and then you could
Hi All,
I would like to improve the guidance given on the UK Tagging Guidelines
page in regards to how to map cycle paths. As a non-cyclist I would like
some advise. So far my research has found:
1. Definitions:
* Cycle Lane - lane marked out by painted lines _within_ the carriageway.
I'm pretty happy to add that any way signposted as either a Byway Public
Byway or Byway Open to All Traffic should be tagged as
designation=byway_open_to_all_traffic as long as it also has a red arrow.
Unlike footpaths there is little chance of a landowner putting up a sign
for a byway unless it
I think the confusion here relates to a failure to differentiate
criminal law - in this case failing to comply with a traffic sign - and
civil law - trespass - in this case not being within the class(es) of
users permitted on a particular section of highway.
It's not a criminal offence to cycle
On 16/05/12 16:55, rob.j.nicker...@gmail.com wrote:
I would like to improve the guidance given on the UK Tagging Guidelines
page in regards to how to map cycle paths. As a non-cyclist I would like
some advise. So far my research has found:
1. Definitions:
* Cycle Lane - lane marked out by
You sometimes get a simple direction sign at a road junction saying
Byway. It just means it doesn't go anywhere very much, but otherwise it's
a normal unclassified (non-urban) road.
Richard
On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 5:43 PM, Rob Nickerson rob.j.nicker...@gmail.comwrote:
I'm pretty happy to add
On 16/05/12 17:55, Andrew Chadwick wrote:
3. Mapping practices:
Clearly a cycle lane should be tagged by adding cycleway=lane to the
way represented by highway=*. Furthermore any cycle tracks that are on
a route completely separate from a highway can be tagged as
highway=cycleway (or
Gosh, you are a glutton for punishment.
cycleway=track is used extensively in some countries
highway=cycleway is use extensively in some countries
cycleway=track was only rendered on OCM relatively recently
cycleway:left|right=track|lane isn't rendered on OCM
the Danes had a big argument about
Haha, I only mean well :-)
The issue came about from trying to improve the guidance provided on the UK
tagging guidelines. Currently I have copied over the guidance that already
existed (to the consultation page), however this was very limited and has
already had cries that foot=no is not
27 matches
Mail list logo
