I agree with Andrew regarding the disincentive of having inconsistent guidance on highway tagging, and associated discussions that don't necessarily reach conclusions. I think we need to continue to prioritize this known issue, to reduce that disincentive and improve data quality/consistency.
I'm curious to see any findings of the subsequent "post mortem" work to develop more clear and consistent guidance for highway tagging. Ultimately, I think the available guidance needs to be consolidated, clarified, and made more consistent. That's a substantial task, but as Andrew said, it surely must be possible to come to a conclusion for a generic set of definitions. Cheers, ~~Steve On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 10:41 PM, Suzan Reed <[email protected]> wrote: > Is there a way to have only those tags used in a specific activation > loaded into iD and JOSM so none of the others show? Or something similar? > > Suzan > > > > On Jul 14, 2015, at 2:38 PM, Andrew Patterson <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > Whilst I fully accept the concept of open debate in an attempt to reach > a consensus, I do find the current discussion less than helpful, because of > the range of definitions being thrown out, and the added geographic > dimension to the definitions. This is not helped by the variety in advise > in the instructions for various tasks - ranging from "if in doubt mark it > as a path, and this can be upgraded by someone on the ground" to much more > specific instructions in the Nepalese instructions, for example. But the > type of terrain in which one might contemplate a 4 wheel drive in Africa is > very different to that regularly used in Nepal. > > > > Surely if must be possible to come to a conclusion for a generic set of > definitions. I rather support John Whelan's breakdown, where he suggests > that "if its to a small group of huts its probably a track, if > > its to narrow for a 4X4 and winds its a path, and if I can see two > wheel tracks then its a track unless its between two settlements of > reasonable > > size then its unclassified". > > > > There was a huge correspondence in a similar vein during the early days > of the Nepal disaster, which I found to be a real disincentive to > contributing during the first couple of weeks, and I have only latterly > started working on task. There has also been an impressive and important > Post Mortem exercise to improve things, and I would suggest that the size > of the preset list is one area in which some serious pruning could be done > with consequent increase in transparency to a new comer > > > > > > Andrew > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Andrew Patterson > > > > The information contained in this e-mail and any > > files transmitted with it is confidential and intended for the addressee > only. > > _______________________________________________ > > HOT mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot > > > _______________________________________________ > HOT mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot >
_______________________________________________ HOT mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
