Re: [Tagging] Dispute prevention: meaning of lanes tag
Am 20.04.2012 um 16:58 schrieb Jason Cunningham jamicu...@googlemail.com: On 20 April 2012 14:35, Philip Barnes p...@trigpoint.me.uk wrote: Which prompts another question, do we have a tag for a 'passing place'? There is a photo of one on this page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single-track_road Tag info shows it does highway=passing_place does get used http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=highway%3Dpassing And there is a page on the wiki for it. Thanks for that. I would add a recommendation not to count such places for the lanes-count, but instead use the passing-tag. I will add a link to its article. And here's another question. A twoway single lane highway implies that if you meet a vehicle coming in the other direction the road is blocked. Hence the the common of existence, at least in the UK, of 'Passing Places' mentioned by Philip. A twoway two lane highway implies that common road vehicles can drive down the road each within their own lane? But there is a third situation that in my area is arguably more common than implied single lane status, and that is a road which is wide enough for cars to pass each other at at crawl, but which would be blocked if a large vehicle meets another vehicle. This I assume is impotant information, especially for routing, because these are roads a car owner would wish to avoid if there is an alternative 'true' 2 lane road, and which a lorry or van should avoid unless they must use the road. A while back I went through a period of trying to add lanes, speed limits, and lighting info. This was prompted by the excellent tools produced by ITO map eg www.itoworld.com/map/179 While trying to sort through the confusing speed limit laws in my country, I stumbled across a document advising that roads where two cars could pass slowly or with care, but wider vehciles could not, the road should be considered to consist of 1.5 lanes. Didn't bother to save the document at the time and search engines can't track it down. Does the idea of lanes=1.5 seem acceptable for roads where cars can pass slowly, but wider vehicles will block the road. There is an obvious problem that the decision to label a road as lanes=1.5 is subjective. In my opinion, lanes=1.5 is a very bad choice. We have a tag for this situation: width . According to taginfo, lanes=1.5 is used, but not too often. What should we do? I would recommend not to use it and advise to specify a width (which is also objective rather than subjective as 1.5 is). Opinions? ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Dispute prevention: meaning of lanes tag
On Sat, 21 Apr 2012, Ronnie Soak wrote: In my opinion, lanes=1.5 is a very bad choice. We have a tag for this situation: width . According to taginfo, lanes=1.5 is used, but not too often. What should we do? I would recommend not to use it and advise to specify a width (which is also objective rather than subjective as 1.5 is). +1 The width-tag is widely used, is more general and part of the standard set of fields for many highway-categories in JOSM and Potlatch. It may be harder to estimate a width in meters instead of a lanes count, but I think it's possible within +/- 1m, especially for narrow ways. This difficulty is very true and it disallows collecting more than few of them at a time since you'd have to remember/note those estimates until you have a computer with which you can put that into the db. (I personally only use it with either rather narrow or rather wide ways out of the norm.) The lanes tag is used with integral numbers, most tools won't recognize fractions. And even if they do, it's still highly subjective if it's lanes=1 or lanes=1.5 or lanes=2 if there are no road markings. (If you have to slow down to pass depends on your type of car, the road (and weather/sight) conditions and your bravery/insanity.) I'm not really convinced by the subjectivity fear in this case. It's always quite clear when the road is clearly wider than a single lane (and that is provable too in many cases as you are able to spot few cars passing by ;-)). And on the other end, it is not extremely hard to estimate that it would be rather challenging to pass an incoming car without slowing down. ...What I don't really care if it is called lanes=1.5 or lanes=1/2+some_other_agreed_tag_which_is_not_an_estimated_width=x, but simply saying that use lanes=1/2 alone instead I oppose. -- i.___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Dispute prevention: meaning of lanes tag
Am 21.04.2012 um 13:34 schrieb Ilpo Järvinen ilpo.jarvi...@helsinki.fi: ...What I don't really care if it is called lanes=1.5 or lanes=1/2+some_other_agreed_tag_which_is_not_an_estimated_width=x, but simply saying that use lanes=1/2 alone instead I oppose. I would recommend lanes=2 and width=xxx. Maybe give some examples for the widths of some common, narrow roads? Can someone provide photos and widths? ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Dispute prevention: meaning of lanes tag
On Sat, 21 Apr 2012, Martin Vonwald (Imagic) wrote: Am 21.04.2012 um 13:34 schrieb Ilpo Järvinen ilpo.jarvi...@helsinki.fi: ...What I don't really care if it is called lanes=1.5 or lanes=1/2+some_other_agreed_tag_which_is_not_an_estimated_width=x, but simply saying that use lanes=1/2 alone instead I oppose. I would recommend lanes=2 and width=xxx. Maybe give some examples for the widths of some common, narrow roads? Can someone provide photos and widths? !?! ...No! Unfortunately this was exactly what I oppose! Because: It actually requires a) knowing/estimating and b) storing the width number somewhere until you can put that to the particular osm way. Both a) and b) make it significantly harder to collect compared with something as simple as lanes=1.5 which requires only 1-bit of storage in your memory. I don't mind if we _eventually_ have width too but I think there needs to be some intermediate step in between those to balance ease of collecting and time-consuming accuracy, which is probably the reason we have lanes=1.5 tags in the db in the first place. ...It highlights there's a clear need for this kind of tradeoff (but no assigned tag for it exists other than reusing lanes= but that part could be IMHO easily fixed but that won't happen as long as width is offered as sole alternative :-(). -- i.___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Dispute prevention: meaning of lanes tag
Am 21 Apr 2012 um 13:23 schrieb Philip Barnes p...@trigpoint.me.uk: However OSM does not allow anything other than tagging as 3 lanes, so the above is probably irrelevant to OSM You can Tag lanes:forward= and lanes:backward= Cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Dispute prevention: meaning of lanes tag
Am 21.04.2012 um 14:23 schrieb Ilpo Järvinen ilpo.jarvi...@helsinki.fi: I would recommend lanes=2 and width=xxx. Maybe give some examples for the widths of some common, narrow roads? Can someone provide photos and widths? !?! ...No! Unfortunately this was exactly what I oppose! Sorry, I misunderstood you there. Let us start again: can we at least agree, that it is the correct solution to use width=xxx, but it is difficult to obtain a correct value? If so, how about recommending to use lanes=2 and est_width=4? Or maybe width=4 and source:width=estimated, because application support for est_width is even worse than for width? Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Dispute prevention: meaning of lanes tag
On Sat, 2012-04-21 at 15:31 +0200, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: Am 21 Apr 2012 um 13:23 schrieb Philip Barnes p...@trigpoint.me.uk: However OSM does not allow anything other than tagging as 3 lanes, so the above is probably irrelevant to OSM You can Tag lanes:forward= and lanes:backward= Would this make sense? Lanes=3 Lanes:forward=2 Lanes:backward=2 Phil ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Dispute prevention: meaning of lanes tag
On Sat, 2012-04-21 at 14:08 +0200, Martin Vonwald (Imagic) wrote: Am 21.04.2012 um 13:34 schrieb Ilpo Järvinen ilpo.jarvi...@helsinki.fi: ...What I don't really care if it is called lanes=1.5 or lanes=1/2+some_other_agreed_tag_which_is_not_an_estimated_width=x, but simply saying that use lanes=1/2 alone instead I oppose. I would recommend lanes=2 and width=xxx. Maybe give some examples for the widths of some common, narrow roads? Can someone provide photos and widths? The distinction used by OS is width is more than 4m or less than 4m. Phil ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Dispute prevention: meaning of lanes tag
On Sat, 2012-04-21 at 20:02 +0200, Martin Vonwald wrote: Am 21.04.2012 um 19:11 schrieb Philip Barnes p...@trigpoint.me.uk: The distinction used by OS is width is more than 4m or less than 4m. And what happens if width IS 4m? The words the use are 'generally more than 4m wide' and 'generally less than 4m wide'. Roads of this width will vary in width, they are almost never the same width throughout. Phil ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] highway=services/rest_area
On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 4:23 PM, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com wrote: What's the correct tag for something like this, on a surface road and operated by a private company (chain)? http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/99634310 I don't think there's a single tag that covers a truck stop, though I wouldn't be opposed to highway=services for this, since they almost always include exactly the same amenities as a concessions plaza anyway; they're just not on public land. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Dispute prevention: meaning of lanes tag
If it's 4m, you will be able to see continuous wear on the verge where people drive off the edge of the tarmac. At 4m there will only be wear for occasional large vehicles (tractor tracks, typically). At 6m there's usually a centre line. I'd quite like some tags for these subtleties, but I wouldn't use the lanes tag (so not lanes=1.5) A few standard widths might not come amiss: maybe 3, 3.6, 4.2, 6? Some of you may remember that the OS criteria used to be 14ft (4.2m). ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] How to tag disputed names in the same language?
On Sat, Apr 21, 2012 at 7:30 AM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote: On Apr 20, 2012 9:04 AM, Alan Mintz alan_mintz+...@earthlink.net wrote: I would go with name:en-PH=* or name:en:PH=* to mimic the standard IETF language tag format. en-PH feels more correct, since it's specifying dialect in a standard format. This seems workable. But I don't think that these differing names that are proper nouns can be considered as a difference in dialect. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] School tag
Right now we have amenity=schoolhttp://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dschool, amenity=college http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dcollegeand amenity=universityhttp://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Duniversity. Then we have isced:xxx=value http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:iscedfor determining the level of a school by the International Standard Classification of Education. What about the general subject of a school? There are music schools, law schools, medicine schools, and so on. I would describe them in a tag * school=**. So we would have school=music, school=law etc.. Primary and middle schools that have no specific subject could be school=general. A university is mapped with a polygon that has amenity=university, but individual buildings could have school tags, like school=law or school=economics. This could also be used with: - driving schools (amenity=school + school=driving instead of amenity=driving_school) - foreign language schools (amenity=school + school=language + language=en;fr;de) - pottery workshops (amenity=school + school=pottery) - karate schools (amenity=school + school=sport + sport=karate) There are a lot of possible values for this tag, some of them are: Agriculture, Architecture, Biology, Chemistry, Design, Driving, Economics, Electronics, Geodesy, Geography, Geology, Language, Law, Mathematics, Medicine, Music, Painting, Physics, Sport, etc.. Thanks for your opinions, Janko Mihelić ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] School tag
This could also be used with: driving schools (amenity=school + school=driving instead of amenity=driving_school) foreign language schools (amenity=school + school=language + language=en;fr;de) pottery workshops (amenity=school + school=pottery) karate schools (amenity=school + school=sport + sport=karate) I think we shouldn't mix general education institutions with hobby skill trainings and short-term professional trainings. I would leave amenity=school for general education secondary schools only. And introduce the new tag amenity=training for driving schools, dance schools, sport schools, sysadmin or Cisco courses. Or make the new high-level tag education=* and put there all the tags about education: education=school, education=university, education=college, education=training. In any way of tagging general education and skill training must be put in different tag values. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
