Re: [Tagging] tag templates in the wiki

[Hufkratzer]

On 13.08.2019 07:21, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:


12 Aug 2019, 20:24 by dieterdre...@gmail.com:



sent from a phone

On 12. Aug 2019, at 18:02, Andy Townsend 
wrote:

I don't think it's unavoidable - presumably you can just
ignore the wikidata stuff and carry on as before?



I had thought so as well, but then I saw the edit which removed
the whole template information from the page and it continued to
show the information, so it was clear there was another system,
which isn’t currently logged in the page history, and is another
layer of complexity which makes it harder to add this or to note
when someone changes it.

Fortunately we can (and should) ignore it
by filling parameters of the template.



On the wiki pages you can ignore / overwrite most of the the values from 
data items but in iD you always get the values from the data items. In 
JOSM not yet, but perhaps that will come one day too, see 
https://josm.openstreetmap.de/ticket/17842 So perhaps better not ignore 
them.


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] tag templates in the wiki

[Mateusz Konieczny]

12 Aug 2019, 20:24 by dieterdre...@gmail.com:

>
>
> sent from a phone
>
>> On 12. Aug 2019, at 18:02, Andy Townsend  wrote:
>>
>> I don't think it's unavoidable - presumably you can just ignore the wikidata 
>> stuff and carry on as before?
>>
>
>
> I had thought so as well, but then I saw the edit which removed the whole 
> template information from the page and it continued to show the information, 
> so it was clear there was another system, which isn’t currently logged in the 
> page history, and is another layer of complexity which makes it harder to add 
> this or to note when someone changes it.
>
Fortunately we can (and should) ignore it
by filling parameters of the template.___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Classifying roads from Trunk to Tertiary and Unclassified

[Joseph Eisenberg]

Right. As Martin, said, while we shouldn't mistag for a better
rendering, it would be great if our tagging would at least make it
possible to have a consistent rendering.

Rather than using highway=trunk to define a autovia, motorroad or
expressway with a certain maxspeed=, lanes=, or surface quality, I
believe it is better to either 1) follow the national classification
system, when this is logical and internally consistent, or 2) use
network relationships and to assign a classification for a complete
road route between towns. Changing the classification from trunk to
primary to trunk again, in the middle of a rural area, breaks the
network.

Certainly mappers should also tag maxspeed=, lanes=, surface=, and
should map divided highways as 2 separate ways, and grade-separated
intersections with bridge= and tunnel= + layer= so that routers will
recognize faster routes.

I'm also in favor of using motorroad=yes and expressway=yes (Actually,
I think these mean nearly the same thing?) in Europe and in the USA
respectively, to define "autovias", "motorroads" and "expressways"
specifically.

But I don't think it's a good idea if highway=trunk is only limited to
segments of expressway or motorroad, because this leads to an
incomplete network, as in France. It would be nice if you could just
render all highway=primary along with trunk, but in France this still
leads to smaller gaps where primary roads suddenly end.

If each country could develop internally consistent highway classes
that show the network consistently, at some scale, this would help
renders and map users.

-Joseph

On 8/13/19, Martin Koppenhoefer  wrote:
>
>
> sent from a phone
>
>> On 13. Aug 2019, at 02:21, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I think your confusing tagging with rendering.
>>
>> Tagging is what is on the ground.
>> The road from Toulouse toward Lyon may physically change between the two,
>> so the tagging follows that (I don't think so but as an example?).
>
>
> I believe the issue is that in a proper network you would expect not to find
> gaps at specific zoom levels, when there are actually connections in reality
> (those should show up at the same time (zoom), or not, if you want to make a
> nice network map).
>
> If classes like motorway or trunk are bound to legal or physical
> characteristics rather than only a hierarchical network, and aren’t
> “complete” from a network aspect, you will get the gaps.
>
>
> Cheers Martin
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Classifying roads from Trunk to Tertiary and Unclassified

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 13. Aug 2019, at 02:21, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> I think your confusing tagging with rendering.
> 
> Tagging is what is on the ground.
> The road from Toulouse toward Lyon may physically change between the two, so 
> the tagging follows that (I don't think so but as an example?).


I believe the issue is that in a proper network you would expect not to find 
gaps at specific zoom levels, when there are actually connections in reality 
(those should show up at the same time (zoom), or not, if you want to make a 
nice network map).

If classes like motorway or trunk are bound to legal or physical 
characteristics rather than only a hierarchical network, and aren’t “complete” 
from a network aspect, you will get the gaps.


Cheers Martin 
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Culverts

[Warin]

This is NOT about tagging.

___Take it elsewhere._

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Classifying roads from Trunk to Tertiary and Unclassified

[Warin]

On 13/08/19 02:02, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:

yopaseopor,

My initial question was really about Indonesia in particular, and
countries without established, official highway classification systems
in general.

But I took a look at Spain, and while I don't know much about the
local road system, the use of highway=trunk vs highway=primary looks
quite good!

See the current rendering around the city of Soria, Spain:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=8/41.749/-2.444
https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=7/41.500/-2.340

There is 1, and only 1, trunk road (or motorway) from Soria to each of
the 7 cities around it.

This is also true of Cordoba:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=8/37.9875/-4.7763

And it looks like every place=city in Spain is connected by
highway=trunk or highway=motorway to all of the other cities. This
means you can render a map with just these 2 tags and place=city, and
have a complete national roadmap.

I actually think this is a great example of what I would like to see
in Indonesia.

In contrast, look at Toulouse, France:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=7/43.588/1.384
- A highway peters out to the northeast (toward Lyon) and to the south
(toward Andorra). But if you zoom in to see the primary roads, it's
clear that the highway has switched from trunk to primary mid-route.
This makes it difficult to render a proper map.


I think your confusing tagging with rendering.

Tagging is what is on the ground.
The road from Toulouse toward Lyon may physically change between the two, so 
the tagging follows that (I don't think so but as an example?).

Rendering then has to make choices. If the choice is simply based on the 
tagging alone then there will be gaps,
particularly if those choices are made over large areas with various levels of 
infrastructure.
If the choice includes determinations of making at least one road connection 
from every city at some zoom level then you may have a 'better' map.
Similarly if the choice includes determining that little information is shown 
over some area of the map at some zoom level and so more detail can be resolved 
there you may have a 'better' map.

Each time these choices are made the complexity increases, if done manually 
then each time the map is remade there will be time spent on it.
If done by computation then there will be some computer time on it and 
occasionally errors will be encountered.

I have a road in one state at one level but when it crosses the state line it 
changes as that state regards it as a lower level .. and
the road does deteriorate quite noticeably! The tagging is correct but most 
maps show the road vanishing at one zoom level, you have to zoom in to see the 
poorer road.
The present rendering 'rules' don't resolve these issues as they are simple 
rules without too much complexity.
To get these rendering issues resolved will take some time, and more computer 
time.



___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] tag templates in the wiki

[Yuri Astrakhan]

"OSM meta item" or a "OSM meta dataitem"... naming is hard :)

Wikibase is too close to Wikidata, thus has caused some confusion -- that's
why I avoid calling it that.

I agree that we can (and should!) customize data items editing experience,
make it simpler for OSM community. This is surprisingly easy, and requires
just a bit of JavaScript skills (and some time).  By comparison, Wikidata
has hundreds of such tools for editing Wikidata, so we can build our UI
based on that knowledge.

The main goal of data items is to solve a significant data problem we have
at the moment -- documentation does not match across languages. Languages
do not agree on statuses (obsolete, in use, approved, ...).  So do usage
rules (onWay, onNode, ...).

So we either have to agree that the mapper's language determines how they
should map, and cause issues in the areas of multilingual mappers, or we
try to fix it the proper way - by having one source of truth that documents
most basic data in a language-agnostic way, and each wiki page reflect that.

Another big benefit of data items is the ability for the 3rd party tools,
such as iD editor, to directly use this data, without the complexities of
(often broken) wiki markup parsing.  In part thanks to the iD showing tag
info from data items, the descriptions have been edited tens of thousands
of times by over 50 users.

Hope this helps, cheers!
-Yuri

On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 5:46 PM Joseph Eisenberg 
wrote:

> I’ve been calling the system “wikibase”, but don’t know if this is
> clearer.
>
> I’d avoid saying “OSM data items” because this sounds very similar to “OSM
> database objects”.’
>
> We could say “(OSM) wiki data items”?
>
> Or “Openstreetmap.org wikibase data items”?
>
> But what do we call the whole data system: “the OSM wiki wikibase?”
> “wiki.openstreetmap.org wikibase?”
> “openstreetmap.org wiki data item system?”
>
> Ugh. I can’t think of a 100% clear and unambiguous term to use for data
> items or the whole system.
>
> It’s hard to avoid confusion with the OSM database (nodes/ways) vs the
> wiki data.
>
> Joseph
>
> On Tue, Aug 13, 2019 at 4:18 AM Tobias Knerr  wrote:
>
>> On 12.08.19 20:27, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
>> > AFAIK the template is not filled from wikidata.org but rather from a
>> wikidata installation on OpenStreetMap-Foundation servers (or for
>> OpenStreetMap but on another server), with information harvested in the osm
>> wiki. It is a parallel system to wikidata.org by wikimedia.(?)
>>
>> Yes. The OSM "data items" use the same software as Wikidata, but it's an
>> entirely separate installation on wiki.openstreetmap.org. Technically,
>> it's just an add-on (extension) for the wiki software.
>>
>> There *is* a Wikidata link on some key and tag pages, but that is simply
>> an outgoing external link which doesn't do anything magical and is
>> unrelated to the above.
>>
>> Tobias
>>
>> ___
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] tag templates in the wiki

[Joseph Eisenberg]

I’ve been calling the system “wikibase”, but don’t know if this is clearer.

I’d avoid saying “OSM data items” because this sounds very similar to “OSM
database objects”.’

We could say “(OSM) wiki data items”?

Or “Openstreetmap.org wikibase data items”?

But what do we call the whole data system: “the OSM wiki wikibase?”
“wiki.openstreetmap.org wikibase?”
“openstreetmap.org wiki data item system?”

Ugh. I can’t think of a 100% clear and unambiguous term to use for data
items or the whole system.

It’s hard to avoid confusion with the OSM database (nodes/ways) vs the wiki
data.

Joseph

On Tue, Aug 13, 2019 at 4:18 AM Tobias Knerr  wrote:

> On 12.08.19 20:27, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> > AFAIK the template is not filled from wikidata.org but rather from a
> wikidata installation on OpenStreetMap-Foundation servers (or for
> OpenStreetMap but on another server), with information harvested in the osm
> wiki. It is a parallel system to wikidata.org by wikimedia.(?)
>
> Yes. The OSM "data items" use the same software as Wikidata, but it's an
> entirely separate installation on wiki.openstreetmap.org. Technically,
> it's just an add-on (extension) for the wiki software.
>
> There *is* a Wikidata link on some key and tag pages, but that is simply
> an outgoing external link which doesn't do anything magical and is
> unrelated to the above.
>
> Tobias
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] tag templates in the wiki

[Tobias Knerr]

On 12.08.19 20:27, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> AFAIK the template is not filled from wikidata.org but rather from a wikidata 
> installation on OpenStreetMap-Foundation servers (or for OpenStreetMap but on 
> another server), with information harvested in the osm wiki. It is a parallel 
> system to wikidata.org by wikimedia.(?)

Yes. The OSM "data items" use the same software as Wikidata, but it's an
entirely separate installation on wiki.openstreetmap.org. Technically,
it's just an add-on (extension) for the wiki software.

There *is* a Wikidata link on some key and tag pages, but that is simply
an outgoing external link which doesn't do anything magical and is
unrelated to the above.

Tobias

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Classifying roads from Trunk to Tertiary and Unclassified

[Philip Barnes]

On 12/08/2019 19:06, Paul Allen wrote:
On Mon, 12 Aug 2019 at 18:25, Fernando Trebien 
mailto:fernando.treb...@gmail.com>> wrote:



There are all sorts of opinions on this matter, but trying to define
classification rules based on physical characteristics or
administrative responsibility (municipality, state or national) always
led to unexpected situations here. I guess the UK is somewhat unique
in having an official classification system that matches the
topological organization of the road system.


I would hope the UK is not unique.  The reason it matches (mostly) in 
the UK is that
the classification was assigned based on the characteristics of the 
roads.  It

wasn't somebody making decisions based upon a whim, it tried to assign
categories based upon usage: it defined a route as being primary if it was
the best route.

The UK is not unique. When I first drove to Paris back in 1981, I went 
on the hovercraft to Boulogne and then drove down the N1 to Paris.


It was much like a UK trunk road, mostly two lane, streches of dual 
carriageway and it passed through villages and towns along the way. Far 
nicer than boring Motorways.


I used that route many times over the years, however France 
deccentralised its network and much of this has been lost.


In England/Wales, the road network radiates out from London, with the 
single A digit roads leading to the major destinations.


A1 to Edinburgh, A2 to Dover, A3 to Portsmouth, A4 to Bath, A5 to 
Holyhead and A6 to Carlilse. The network is divided into zones, hence 
most A and B roads between the A5 and A6 (my zone), with start with a 5. 
The exceptions will be roads which  start in a different zone.


Scotland has a similar systen radiating from Edinburgh.

The term trunk is based on the trunk of a tree, with other roads 
branching off.


Phil (trigpoint)

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] tag templates in the wiki

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 12. Aug 2019, at 18:02, Andy Townsend  wrote:
> 
> I'm concerned that some wikidata entries are just plain wrong -


AFAIK the template is not filled from wikidata.org but rather from a wikidata 
installation on OpenStreetMap-Foundation servers (or for OpenStreetMap but on 
another server), with information harvested in the osm wiki. It is a parallel 
system to wikidata.org by wikimedia.(?)


Cheers Martin 
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] tag templates in the wiki

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 12. Aug 2019, at 18:02, Andy Townsend  wrote:
> 
> I don't think it's unavoidable - presumably you can just ignore the wikidata 
> stuff and carry on as before?


I had thought so as well, but then I saw the edit which removed the whole 
template information from the page and it continued to show the information, so 
it was clear there was another system, which isn’t currently logged in the page 
history, and is another layer of complexity which makes it harder to add this 
or to note when someone changes it.

Cheers Martin 
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Classifying roads from Trunk to Tertiary and Unclassified

[Paul Allen]

On Mon, 12 Aug 2019 at 18:25, Fernando Trebien 
wrote:

>
> There are all sorts of opinions on this matter, but trying to define
> classification rules based on physical characteristics or
> administrative responsibility (municipality, state or national) always
> led to unexpected situations here. I guess the UK is somewhat unique
> in having an official classification system that matches the
> topological organization of the road system.
>

I would hope the UK is not unique.  The reason it matches (mostly) in the
UK is that
the classification was assigned based on the characteristics of the roads.
It
wasn't somebody making decisions based upon a whim, it tried to assign
categories based upon usage: it defined a route as being primary if it was
the best route.

Yes, it is the case that trunks are administered by central government, but
again
it wasn't (I hope) that roads were arbitrarily designated as trunks but
that some
roads were so important that central government retained control over them.

We did it all that way because people want guidance in choosing the "best"
route
between A and B.  Before we had routeing algorithms, that was the only way
to do
it.  What surprises me is that some other countries didn't do it that way.

-- 
Paul
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Bicycle kitchens, community centres that offer bicycle repairs etc

[Mateusz Konieczny]

7 Aug 2019, 21:36 by tagging@openstreetmap.org:

> Hi,
>
> I wonder how I should tag bicycle shops that are not shops in the traditional 
> "buy our products" sense.
>
> A community-centre that is also offers bicycle repairs / is a bicycle repair 
> shop.
>
Map like usual repair point and add fee=no (may work for only some of them)?

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Fruit stands and shops selling fresh fruits?

[Mateusz Konieczny]

10 Aug 2019, 02:48 by joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com:

> Is there a more specific tag that should be recommended for a shop
> which specializes in fruit?
>
There are quite similar objects in Poland - stalls on marketplace where people 
are selling
seasonal fruits and vegetables.

I use simply shop=greengrocer with usual tags like opening_hours + 
street_vendor=yes
(street_vendor=yes docs are at 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/street_vendor%3Dyes 

)

I also used shop=greengrocer for shop selling solely fruits,
or even solely single fruit/vegetable

additional subtag like it is done for shop=clothes clothes=* is IMHO preferable 
to new shop values

It is mostly for practical reasons - shop=potatoes is not going to be really 
supported,
shop=greengrocer ***=potatoes will be actually supported, satisfies desire for 
deatils
and allows to use this data by data consumers that are actually interested in 
such detail

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Classifying roads from Trunk to Tertiary and Unclassified

[Fernando Trebien]

The international confusion is maddening, but this generic guideline
has helped reach consensus in my area in Brazil:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Ftrebien/Drafts/Generic_highway_classification_principles#Schematic_diagram_and_general_comments

Here's the result after a lot of discussion in the local community:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Brazil/RS/Classifica%C3%A7%C3%A3o_das_rodovias_do_RS#Mapa_de_primary.2C_trunk_e_motorway_no_Rio_Grande_do_Sul

There are all sorts of opinions on this matter, but trying to define
classification rules based on physical characteristics or
administrative responsibility (municipality, state or national) always
led to unexpected situations here. I guess the UK is somewhat unique
in having an official classification system that matches the
topological organization of the road system.

On Sat, Aug 10, 2019 at 5:27 AM Joseph Eisenberg
 wrote:
>
> We recently discussed the confusion about unclassified vs residential
> recently, but a more significant issue is that different countries and
> regions have a wide variety of practices about assigning the major
> highway classes, especially trunk and primary.
>
> In some countries, including parts of Europe and parts of the USA,
> highway=trunk is reserved for "expressways" or "motorroads" with
> certain physical characteristics. However, in England where the tag
> originated, highway=trunk is used for the main, non-motorway highways
> in the country. As can be seen by glancing at the rendering of
> England, these highway=trunk connect just about every place=town in
> England: https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=6/53.021/-1.033
>
> This means that highway=primary and highway=secondary is used for most
> other paved roads with one lane in each direction. Many place=villages
> in England are connected to a  highway=primary and the rest have a
> highway=secondary. And most hamlets are on a highway=tertiary which
> connects to larger villages or a town.
>
> This leaves highway=unclassified for very minor roads, often too
> narrow for 2 wide vehicles to pass each other, connecting isolated
> dwellings and farms. This is how they are like residential roads, in
> the English system.
>
> I would like to adapt this system to Indonesia, where the government
> has not yet classified most roads below the National level, but the
> "Jalan Nasional" class of major highways has already been decided to
> be mapped as highway=trunk.
>
> See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Indonesian_Tagging_Guidelines#Roads
> for an attempt.
>
> The idea is that one can determine the classification of highway based
> on what size of settlements it connects:
>
> trunk - connects cities to cities ("National Roads")
> primary - connects a town to a city or another town
> secondary - connects a village to a town/city or another village
> tertiary - connects a hamlet to a village/town or another hamlet
> unclassified - connect farms / isolated dwellings to a hamlet/vilage
> or another farm.
>
> This system is internally consistent and works well for rendering, as
> well as for routing.
>
> Thoughts?
> - Joseph
> (I wish I could review this with other Indonesian mappers, but we
> don't have an active forum or mailing list)
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging



-- 
Fernando Trebien

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Tagging Digest, Vol 119, Issue 55

[Mateusz Konieczny]

12 Aug 2019, 18:13 by ulamm.b...@t-online.de :

Please stop immediately any offtopic postings to TAGGING mailing list.

Discussion of your misunderstanding of copyright that resulted in your 
justified ban
are completely offtopic here.

In case that you are willing to learn more about copyright - see
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk 

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Classifying roads from Trunk to Tertiary and Unclassified

[Philip Barnes]

On Monday, 12 August 2019, Steve Doerr wrote:
> On 12/08/2019 14:36, Paul Allen wrote:
> > Where a country-wide classification exists, it is usual for this to be 
> > reflected in the
> > numbering scheme and the signage.  In the UK it may not be readily 
> > apparent whether
> > a road is a trunk or a primary since they'll both be "A" roads with 
> > the same style of
> > signage, but there's an obvious difference in signage between A roads 
> > and B roads
> 
> Careful. If my understanding is correct, the term 'trunk road' as used 
> in the UK does not map to highway=trunk in OSM. The latter has always I 
> believe been used to represent the 'primary route network' in the UK 
> (excluding the motorways), that is those A roads (and possibly some B 
> roads) which connect the designated 'primary destinations' on the road 
> network. They should be characterized by green signage, which therefore 
> distinguishes them from other A roads which are not part of the primary 
> network (black-and-white signage, confusingly mapped as highway=primary 
> in OSM).
> 
That is a correct summary.

Although most in the UK will be unaware  of the difference between trunk 
(national government operated) and other green signed A road (local government 
operated).

There  is no discernable difference between tha A49 south of Shrewsbury and A49 
north of Shrewsbury.

Phil (trigpoint)

-- 
Sent from my Sailfish device
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Classifying roads from Trunk to Tertiary and Unclassified

[Steve Doerr]

On 12/08/2019 14:36, Paul Allen wrote:
Where a country-wide classification exists, it is usual for this to be 
reflected in the
numbering scheme and the signage.  In the UK it may not be readily 
apparent whether
a road is a trunk or a primary since they'll both be "A" roads with 
the same style of
signage, but there's an obvious difference in signage between A roads 
and B roads


Careful. If my understanding is correct, the term 'trunk road' as used 
in the UK does not map to highway=trunk in OSM. The latter has always I 
believe been used to represent the 'primary route network' in the UK 
(excluding the motorways), that is those A roads (and possibly some B 
roads) which connect the designated 'primary destinations' on the road 
network. They should be characterized by green signage, which therefore 
distinguishes them from other A roads which are not part of the primary 
network (black-and-white signage, confusingly mapped as highway=primary 
in OSM).


--
Steve

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Classifying roads from Trunk to Tertiary and Unclassified

[yo paseopor]

Sorry for this missunderstanding.
In Spain we have motorways (autopistas) and also we have motorways
(autovías). The problem goes with some roads (in some little moments can
have two lanes per direction) that does not fit the standards of an
"autovía or autopista" (bicycles, crossings at the same level -with no
bridges with roundabouts to avoid the direct crossing) with unpaved tracks,
no physical separation between directions... I assure you trunks are not
motorways here in Spain.
Our problems are first with same administrative classification (Nacional N-
roads) but with some of them there is little maintance and horrible
smoothness instead of newer constructions versus new roads done by
Country's government . Or with very good roads (infrastructures are good
pub for the government zone's so they publicate detailed projects with
these kind of information and previsions

Our physical classification would not be subjective:

-Is average speed statistics (here you can access and use this data for
free) subjective?
-Is Average Daily Traffic (ADT) data subjective?
-Is maximum speed subjective?
-Is the existence of bridges to avoid track crossings subjective?
-Is the restriction for some kinds of traffic (bikes) subjective?

No, they don't.

The signage will be ALWAYS represented by the first letter of the reference.

Also I want to attach some pics of these questions

https://imgur.com/R1xTsXu
C-37 in this section should be trunk: 100/80, interlevel (with bridges)
crossing with tracks, restricted access to bikes and agricultural
vehicles...
But it is not of Fomento (Country): it is from Generalitat de Catalunya
(State). So...it would not be the best level fro a road. Some people in
Spain thinks this should be primary for this last reason I have said. Some
trucks uses this to go to France by Pyrenees instead of paying AP-7 toll.

https://imgur.com/vXeELEN
CG 2.2 in this section also should be trunk: same case before. It is from
Xunta de Galicia (State), not Fomento (Country)


https://imgur.com/FyRh0Je
N-260 in this section should be...secondary o tertiary: -of 50 maximum
speed, all traffic allowed, road marks are orientatives of the middle of
the road, two big cars does not fit at the same time ... But it is of
Fomento (Country) so some people thinks this should be trunk. No big trucks
use this section to travel around  Pyrenees. It is better to use whatever
other solution.

https://imgur.com/ejM93LR
N-340 in this section should be primary:50/60 maximum speed, all traffic
allowed but it is near the second city in population of Spain, Barcelona
and this is the alternative of AP-7. Also two cars fit in. It is of Fomento
(Country) so some people thinks this should be trunk.

https://imgur.com/3AaQzpS
T-340 in this section should be primary: 80/60 average speed, all traffic
allowed, crossings with tracks at the same level without no bridges. But it
is from Diputació de Tarragona (Province) so for some people this should be
secondary or tertiary. It is the main road to access to Delta de l'Ebre one
of the most important Natural Parks in Catalonia.


https://imgur.com/y35kjmm
A-14 in this section should be motorway (autovía) . In Spain to be
"Autopista" you should to have these three things:
-No same-level crossings (without bridges and exits), no traffic signals
and roundabouts
-Minimum speed of 60 km/h
-Have two or more lanes per direction
-Strict criteria for access the way, from motorway junctions and not
directly.
When you don't cover one only of this criteria you are not Autopista , you
are Autovía (motorway also). Fomento decides in the majority of situations
convert their roads in motorways.

And yes Spain is different. I remember this https://imgur.com/mgfNbLs
between Liverpool and Manchester is a "trunk"... Here in Spain we don't
have this in a trunk for about...20 years.
Also other problem comes when you have a "Nacional" (administrative trunk)
and a parallel autovía (motorway). General traffic goes by motorway, so the
trunk has A.D.T. data more little than other secondary or primary roads of
the same zone (for this reason this section of the "Nacional" should be
tertiary. Well, in Catalonia we try it officially. Here it ICGC Catalan
Government (State) map:http://www.icc.cat/vissir3/index.html?DsebH9VpR
Fomento it is not agree with that: https://imgur.com/YH0GiWY
In this section there are not one but TWO motorways to avoid and pass the
city of Tarragona so tertiary is the most accurate category for this
section of "Nacional".

Openstreetmap should represent the reality of the place: you cannot avoid
the importance of some ways because they are from a little government. Or
in a reverse way: you cannot send the trucks via a sloped-curve-way because
it is "National"

Salut i carreteres (Health and roads)
yopaseopor























On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 12:35 PM Paul Allen  wrote:

> On Mon, 12 Aug 2019 at 01:20, yo paseopor  wrote:
>
>>
>> trunk: 4,3,2-l

Re: [Tagging] Classifying roads from Trunk to Tertiary and Unclassified

[Paul Allen]

On Mon, 12 Aug 2019 at 17:27, Joseph Eisenberg 
wrote:

> So to put it together
>
> 0) Motorway
> 1) Trunk - national roads; the main roads that connect provinces to
> other provinces and cities to other cities. Start/end at cities.
> 2) Primary - main road that connect districts (the level below
> provinces) to other districts, and towns to other towns and cities.
> Start/end at towns (or cities).
> 3) Secondary - connect sub-districts to others, and villages to larger
> towns, by connecting to a primary road at some point. Not the main
> route in a district.
> 4) Tertiary - connect villages and hamelts to other villages, and
> connect to a secondary (or primary) road. Not the main route in a
> subdistrict.
> 5) Unclassified - connects hamlets and isolated dwellings to villages
> and larger areas, by connecting to a tertiary, secondary or primary
> road. Never a major through-route.
>

Looks sensible and usable to me.  Although looking at your changeset
comments
your fellow mappers seem to think that a couple of houses along a road make
it
a residential road.  Here are some examples you might wish to show them to
make
a point...

Here are a couple of houses along the A487 (the trunk road linking
Fishguard to Bangor, mostly
single carriageway with short sections of dual carriageway such as the
Cardigan bypass):
https://www.openstreetmap.org/?mlat=52.10448&mlon=-4.59910#map=19/52.10448/-4.59910

Here's the same A487 passing through the hamlet of Blaenannerch:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/?mlat=52.11214&mlon=-4.56329#map=17/52.11214/-4.56329

Here's the same A487 passing through the town of Aberaeron:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/?mlat=52.2418&mlon=-4.2608#map=16/52.2418/-4.2608

Here's the same A487 passing through the city of Aberystwyth:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/?mlat=52.4169&mlon=-4.0730#map=14/52.4169/-4.0730

Having such a route switch from being a trunk road to a residential every
time there were
a few houses (or even a lot of houses) would not be very helpful to
somebody trying to
plan a journey from Fishguard to Bangor.  It would certainly make it a lot
harder to figure
out, in advance, how you'd traverse Aberystwyth.

-- 
Paul
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Tagging Digest, Vol 119, Issue 55

[Paul Allen]

On Mon, 12 Aug 2019 at 17:15, Ulrich Lamm  wrote:

> 1. The critics, I have answered on this way were not that I had used
> forbidden sources, but that my entries were not reliable.
>

I read them as saying they were not VERIFIABLE because you had used
forbidden sources.

2. Woodpeck has banned me just in the moment, when all geographic data of
> the state of Brandenburg got ODB status.
>

I've seen you make similar claims before but it turned out they were not
ODB compatible.

3. It is a difference either to take copies from databases (which is
> allowed only if these are ODB) or to know their contents.
>

Some purists would say you can't even use forbidden sources to figure out
what you should
go and survey or look at more closely in aerial imagery.  But you go
further than that anyway.

Publishing without regard of the state of the art is a crime against the
> real users.
>

That sentiment is why you are a danger to OSM.  You're using the ends to
justify the means.

Most of the essential informations I have recieved by phone from the
> maintaining corporations (Wasser- und Boden-Verbände).
>

Did you tell them why you wanted the information and what you were going to
do with it?  Did
you receive written/printed/electronic communication confirming you were OK
to use it in that
way and that you can show us?

Also pdf maps  are nothing yo can call a forbidden database. Look at the
> map I have linked at the onset of today's thread. Using the information of
> this map for a free hand drawing is no forbidden copy.
>

And that is the other reason you are a danger to OSM.  ANY original work is
automatically
copyright in countries that are signatory to the Berne Convention (Germany
is certainly one).
Hand-drawn maps are copyright, however crude they are.

The relief can be read in ordinary maps
>

Also copyright in ordinary maps.  Very much so.  OSM does have topographic
data available,
and you can use that.  Out-of-copyright maps may have topographic data, and
you can
use those.

and seen by visits of the localities. Irregular colours of the meadows and
> fields
>
 can be seen from various orthophotos, and it is useful to read more than
> one of them,
>

The aerial imagery made available by OSM editors is legal to use.  Things
like Google aerial
imagery are not.

-- 
Paul
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Classifying roads from Trunk to Tertiary and Unclassified

[Joseph Eisenberg]

Jumping back in here, I should clarify that I was mainly thinking
about how to help Indonesia and other countries with developing
Openstreetmap communities decide on ways to use the highway
classification tags, when there isn't a national highway class system,
or when it's not obvious how the local system should fit OSM tags.

In rural Indonesia, as in Australia, Canada, Brazil and other
countries with remote, undeveloped areas, there are often roads that
end at a settlement, and are the only way in or out, in contrast to
places in Europe which have complex networks with many different
options from point A to B.

That's the simple case that I was thinking of: if a road ends at a
city at A and it's the only route to the rest of the island, it's
likely to be a trunk road. If it ends at a town, and it's the only
connection from town A to all the other towns in the province, it's
probably a primary road, and so on. This allows mappers to identify
highway classifications based on the network in OSM data plus place=*
classes, which are fairly objective and verifiable (when based on
population plus services).

I actually heard back from one of the HDM/HOT lead mapper in
Indonesia, and he said that they often use a similar system, in more
populated areas like Java which have many roads and clear
administrative boundaries (unlike here in Papua):

"[National roads] "Jalan Trans-" in every island use highway=trunk.
"But personally, for other hierarchy, I recommend using
[administrative] boundaries.:
 - highway=trunk through province boundaries.
 - highway=primary connecting districts [admin_level=5] to cities or towns.
-  highway=secondary connecting city or town to sub-district
(kecamatan) [admin_level=6], connecting two sub-districts, and also
connected with a primary road.
- highway=tertiary connecting sub-district (kecamatan) to village
(kelurahan) [admin_level=7], crossing village boundaries, and also
connected with secondary road
- highway=unclassified connecting between villages, and isolated houses."

See: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/72632172. - I've edited
for clarity.

So that matches my thoughts about matching highway classes with the
settlements they connect as a main route, but also considers if it's
the main road to a whole district, sub-district or (administrative)
village. Generally every province (level 4) has at least 1 city and
each district (level 5) has at least 1 town, so the two ideas usually
match.

So to put it together

0) Motorway
1) Trunk - national roads; the main roads that connect provinces to
other provinces and cities to other cities. Start/end at cities.
2) Primary - main road that connect districts (the level below
provinces) to other districts, and towns to other towns and cities.
Start/end at towns (or cities).
3) Secondary - connect sub-districts to others, and villages to larger
towns, by connecting to a primary road at some point. Not the main
route in a district.
4) Tertiary - connect villages and hamelts to other villages, and
connect to a secondary (or primary) road. Not the main route in a
subdistrict.
5) Unclassified - connects hamlets and isolated dwellings to villages
and larger areas, by connecting to a tertiary, secondary or primary
road. Never a major through-route.

- Joseph

On 8/13/19, Paul Allen  wrote:
> On Mon, 12 Aug 2019 at 16:44, Philip Barnes  wrote:
>
>> There is at least one trunk road (green signs) which has a B
>> classification. A6 to M6 near Shap.
>>
>> There's always one.  Sigh.
>
> I'd expect it to eventually get a new A number.  Possibly with a very large
> value of "eventually."
>
> --
> Paul
>

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] tag templates in the wiki

[Paul Allen]

On Mon, 12 Aug 2019 at 17:05, Andy Townsend  wrote:

> useful despite that.
>
> I'm concerned that some wikidata entries are just plain wrong -
> especially in places where OSM's use of a word doesn't match the normal
> English (any English - English, American, Hiberno-, etc.) usage of that
> word.  Examples include
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:place%3Dcity


That means https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St_Davids  loses it's city status
as far as OSM
is concerned.  But it lost city status towards the end of the 19th Century,
only to have it
restored in 1994.  Easy come, Easy go.


> (though there wikidata's English description at
> https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q515
> "large and permanent human settlement by size of its inhabitants" adds
> extra comedy),


There were Nephilim in the cities after OSM's Wikipedia/Wikidata
reorganization (the
words in Genesis 6:4 are a mistranslation).

 --
Paul
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Tagging Digest, Vol 119, Issue 55

[Ulrich Lamm]

1. The critics, I have answered on this way were not that I had used forbidden 
sources, but that my entries were not reliable.
2. Woodpeck has banned me just in the moment, when all geographic data of the 
state of Brandenburg got ODB status.
3. It is a difference either to take copies from databases (which is allowed 
only if these are ODB) or to know their contents.
Publishing without regard of the state of the art is a crime against the real 
users.
4. If you follow the development of my edits, you can see that I have continued 
systematical mapping, 
but after the first punishments, I have not entered informations that are 
available from public databases only.

Most of the essential informations I have recieved by phone from the 
maintaining corporations (Wasser- und Boden-Verbände).
Also pdf maps  are nothing yo can call a forbidden database. Look at the map I 
have linked at the onset of today's thread. Using the information of this map 
for a free hand drawing is no forbidden copy.
The relief can be read in ordinary maps and seen by visits of the localities.
Irregular colours of the meadows and fields can be seen from various 
orthophotos, and it is useful to read more than one of them,
as some thing can be invisible in one and obvious in another.

Best regards, Ulrich

Am 12.08.2019 um 17:30 schrieb tagging-requ...@openstreetmap.org:

>  Re: Culverts

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] tag templates in the wiki

[Andy Townsend]

On 12/08/2019 00:05, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
Is it now unavoidable that the info box content on tag definition 
pages in the wiki comes from the database? Is there consensus that the 
higher complexity to edit it is less important than the features we 
gain from it



I don't think it's unavoidable - presumably you can just ignore the 
wikidata stuff and carry on as before?


For example, https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:verge is an in-use 
tag that has not wikidata entry, does not need one and that page is 
useful despite that.


I'm concerned that some wikidata entries are just plain wrong - 
especially in places where OSM's use of a word doesn't match the normal 
English (any English - English, American, Hiberno-, etc.) usage of that 
word.  Examples include 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:place%3Dcity (though there 
wikidata's English description at https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q515 
"large and permanent human settlement by size of its inhabitants" adds 
extra comedy), https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural%3Dwood 
and https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse%3Dforest which both 
link to https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q4421 .  In each of these cases 
all nuance of the usage of the OSM tag is lost.


Best Regards,

Andy



___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Classifying roads from Trunk to Tertiary and Unclassified

[Joseph Eisenberg]

yopaseopor,

My initial question was really about Indonesia in particular, and
countries without established, official highway classification systems
in general.

But I took a look at Spain, and while I don't know much about the
local road system, the use of highway=trunk vs highway=primary looks
quite good!

See the current rendering around the city of Soria, Spain:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=8/41.749/-2.444
https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=7/41.500/-2.340

There is 1, and only 1, trunk road (or motorway) from Soria to each of
the 7 cities around it.

This is also true of Cordoba:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=8/37.9875/-4.7763

And it looks like every place=city in Spain is connected by
highway=trunk or highway=motorway to all of the other cities. This
means you can render a map with just these 2 tags and place=city, and
have a complete national roadmap.

I actually think this is a great example of what I would like to see
in Indonesia.

In contrast, look at Toulouse, France:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=7/43.588/1.384
- A highway peters out to the northeast (toward Lyon) and to the south
(toward Andorra). But if you zoom in to see the primary roads, it's
clear that the highway has switched from trunk to primary mid-route.
This makes it difficult to render a proper map.

Nancy, France is similar: https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=7/48.655/6.141
There are several roads that have trunk segments, but come and go (eg
towards Paris, Rheims, Strasbourg, and Mulhouse). It looks like
missing data or a rendering error.

I imagine that mappers in France are using "trunk" for certain
features, like a dual carriageway (2 lanes in each direction, divided
by a barrier), or "expressway" or "motorroad" features, but since
these are only used in certain places, the road looks like it comes
and goes. This means that you have to render highway=primary at all
zoom levels, or else the road network is incomplete.

In theory, private map renders can edit the data to make a nicer
picture, but automated renderings based fully on OSM data (like the
standard layer on openstreetmap.org - Openstreetmap-carto) will not be
able to do much with the situation in France, especially when you look
at how many primary highways there are in a place like England -
rendering those at z5 to z7 leads to quite a mess:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=8/52.288/-0.104

Joseph

On 8/12/19, yo paseopor  wrote:
> In Spain we have big problems, discussions and arguments with that
> question. Last month, a French user complained about the state of a
> "Nacional" (Country Main Road) classified in OSM as trunk.
> These problems have one main reason. Here in Spain, in some places, there
> are six degrees of public administration: European Union, Estado (Country),
> Comunidades Autónomas (state), Provincia (province), Comarca (like county),
> Municipio (like town)...and fourth of them have competences and decisions
> about that.
> Also some Comunidades Autónomas make better investments and spend more
> money in some zones than Country government (because Country government
> prefers to do only motorways all over Spain) . But as for more people
> Country government is the most important (or the only important government
> for the country) the majority of roads that depends of that government are
> "defacto" the most important: trunk.
> This is a mess and a disaster because you have some trunk roads
> (nacionales) that don't deserve this category: roads with less width than
> normal for two lanes,level crossings for all kind of tracks, passing-by
> little villages,  horrible smoothness and with the same track as they were
> created sixty or seventy years ago. Also you have good new 21st century
> ways with only interlevel crossing, average speed of 80/100, big widths per
> lane, but as they are from the government of the province ("Diputaciones")
> or from the government of the "state" they are automatically primary ,
> secondary or tertiary roads. This is not fair. Think about it: a government
> will not spend its money in a road that is not really important.
> Barcelona's Province Government manages about one thousand million euros
> budget. So I assure you if  Barcelona's Province Government wants to build
> a new road in a well-populated area this road would be as good as primary
> or trunk.
> Some people in OSM Spain want other classification criteria (not
> administrative but physical) to make more objective the road
> classification:
>
> trunk: 4,3,2-lane new roads (newer than twenty years, with new track), with
> only interlevel crossings and exits, average speed of 80/100, and wide
> lanes. It is possible bikes or agricultural vehicles would be prohibited in
> these kind of ways.
> primary: 3,2-lane main roads, with crossings at the same level, average
> speed of 60/80, and wide lanes. All traffic should be allowed.
> secondary: 3,2-lane roads, connecting small territories, crossings at the
> same level, always with road marks

Re: [Tagging] Classifying roads from Trunk to Tertiary and Unclassified

[Paul Allen]

On Mon, 12 Aug 2019 at 16:44, Philip Barnes  wrote:

> There is at least one trunk road (green signs) which has a B
> classification. A6 to M6 near Shap.
>
> There's always one.  Sigh.

I'd expect it to eventually get a new A number.  Possibly with a very large
value of "eventually."

-- 
Paul
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Use of tag "import=yes" on objects, not changesets?

[Joseph Eisenberg]

Well, I just realized that a number of Indonesian and Tanzanian HOT
mappers worked on my area of Indonesia this month. I haven't found out
if they used facebook's new software, but I'm a little annoyed at how
many footpaths they changed to highway=track. In a few cases there
actually was a newly-built road that replaced a footpath, but several
times the old footpath way was reused, even though the road takes a
rather different route around hills and streams (gentler curves, etc)
and needed to be remapped. It's hours of work to improve. Perhaps this
is just the standard for the HDM / HOT work when it's done by mappers
from across the country, or some from across the Indian Ocean, in this
case.

In areas where I don't map as actively, they did add a number of new
roads that were built in the last couple of years. I'll have to get
more involved with their planning to avoid problems in the future.

On 8/11/19, Dave Swarthout  wrote:
> The Facebook team did employ some sort of AI to assist in the
> identification of highways but it wasn't always right. And the mappers they
> employed didn't know OSM very well. We met with them several times to offer
> advice and hints but some of the more active mappers in Thailand are still
> railing about the failure of the team to come up to speed. They joined OSM,
> they mapped, they departed. Next up, Grab. Another huge imbroglio resulted.
> Same issues. Inaccurate mapping, broken routes, especially in Bangkok.
>
> The horse has definitely left the barn. We're left with what remains a very
> large task of cleaning up and verifying. On a positive note, they added
> thousands of highways for us and made their high-quality DigitalGlobe
> imagery available to ordinary OSMers. That, to me anyway, was well worth
> the trade-off.
>
> On Sat, Aug 10, 2019 at 9:43 AM Paul Allen  wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 10 Aug 2019 at 17:27, Dave Swarthout 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> The decision to use the import=yes tag wasn't mine nor that of other
>>> experienced Thailand mappers. The Facebook crew "invented" this use, for
>>> whatever internal reason(s)of their own and we local mappers simply went
>>> along with it because we were desperate for a method with which to check
>>> their work.
>>>
>>
>> If Joseph was right that Facebook used AI on the aerial imagery then I'd
>> say it does meet some
>> of the criteria for an import unless the results were first verified by
>> humans.  And since it
>> sounds like Facebook dumped the unverified AI output into OSM for humans
>> to check, then
>> import=yes doesn't sound unreasonable (although it might have been better
>> as a changeset
>> tag rather than an object tag).  Would something like AI_assisted have
>> been better?  Maybe.
>> Would a changeset tag have been better?  Maybe.  Is there any point
>> locking the stable door
>> now the horse has bolted?  No.  Can we persuade Facebook to do it any
>> differently in the
>> future?  I have my doubts, and I expect Facebook horses will keep bolting
>> because they
>> never lock the stable doors.
>>
>> --
>> Paul
>>
>>
>
> --
> Dave Swarthout
> Homer, Alaska
> Chiang Mai, Thailand
> Travel Blog at http://dswarthout.blogspot.com
>

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Classifying roads from Trunk to Tertiary and Unclassified

[Philip Barnes]

There is at least one trunk road (green signs) which has a B classification. A6 
to M6 near Shap.

Phil (trigpoint)

 

On Monday, 12 August 2019, Paul Allen wrote:
> On Mon, 12 Aug 2019 at 15:56, Martin Koppenhoefer 
> wrote:
> 
> >
> >
> 
> > > If your country's government indicates with signs
> > > that a road as a primary route then that is what it is.
> >
> > no government says „primary“ road, they might say „A road“, or
> > „Bundesstraße“ but the latter is only telling that the Federal government
> > of Germany is in charge of the maintenance (i.e. it is somehow deemed to be
> > important, but it doesn’t say _how_ important it is, because importance
> > varies among Bundesstraßen, and it is only generally more important than a
> > Kreisstraße (local connection road), while in a specific case it may be
> > less important than a specific Kreisstraße.
> >
> 
> There's always one country does it differently. :p  I've just had a look
> into it, and Germany is
> rather messy. :(
> 
> Here the national government decides on which roads are primary and which
> are secondary.
> Some primary roads are designated trunk roads and they are maintained by
> national
> government with all others being maintained at the county level.  It's
> possible somebody
> could find an exceptional case and argue that a UK B-road ought to be
> tagged as a
> primary route, or an A-road be tagged as a secondary, but I doubt it.  In a
> few cases new
> roads or motorways have resulted in former A-roads being given a new B
> number by
> the government itself.  I'd hesitate to buck the system in the UK even if I
> found a
> very exceptional case.  Especially as speed limits and lane counts could be
> used
> by routers to prefer a secondary route to a primary route in some
> situations.
> 
> A map that highlighted roads in a way that conflicted with signage would be
> somewhat
> confusing.  Here we're used to the idea that a primary route is a better
> choice than
> a secondary route, all other things being equal.  If you're planning a
> journey you look
> at the primary routes first and maybe refine it a little by diverting onto
> secondary routes
> for part of the journey (actually you'd look at motorways first).
> 
> I’m all for recording these classes (we do it in ref in Germany and Italy),
> > but they cannot be an argument in the individual case in favor of a
> > specific osm highway class.
> >
> 
> In the case of Germany, I agree.  In Germany it's not that simple.  From
> what I've read
> the number of digits indicates how important the road is.  Sort of.  There
> are exceptions.
> :(
> 
> -- 
> Paul
>

-- 
Sent from my Sailfish device
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] tag templates in the wiki

[Joseph Eisenberg]

I've found it quite confusing. Fortunately, user Yurik, who seems to
be leading the efforts to create the data items (wikibase), has been
quick about answering my questions when I didn't understand the
system.

But initially I couldn't figure out how to add description in another
language (turns out you have to change the language of the wiki
interface), and it can be quite confusing when a tag status or "see
also" appears, yet there is nothing in the page source.

In the long term it might be ok if the current system is entirely
replaced, but the current situation is confusing. And I'm not yet
convinced that editing the data items will be easier, in English or
for translated and localized wiki pages.

On 8/12/19, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 12/08/19 09:05, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
>>
>> I believe this is incapacitating the wider community and creating a
>> context where it becomes almost impossible for an ordinary mapper to
>> make even a small modification to these parts in the wiki.
>>
>
> I don't think making a change is a problem. The problem is tracking the
> history so you can see the evolution.
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Classifying roads from Trunk to Tertiary and Unclassified

[Paul Allen]

On Mon, 12 Aug 2019 at 15:56, Martin Koppenhoefer 
wrote:

>
>

> > If your country's government indicates with signs
> > that a road as a primary route then that is what it is.
>
> no government says „primary“ road, they might say „A road“, or
> „Bundesstraße“ but the latter is only telling that the Federal government
> of Germany is in charge of the maintenance (i.e. it is somehow deemed to be
> important, but it doesn’t say _how_ important it is, because importance
> varies among Bundesstraßen, and it is only generally more important than a
> Kreisstraße (local connection road), while in a specific case it may be
> less important than a specific Kreisstraße.
>

There's always one country does it differently. :p  I've just had a look
into it, and Germany is
rather messy. :(

Here the national government decides on which roads are primary and which
are secondary.
Some primary roads are designated trunk roads and they are maintained by
national
government with all others being maintained at the county level.  It's
possible somebody
could find an exceptional case and argue that a UK B-road ought to be
tagged as a
primary route, or an A-road be tagged as a secondary, but I doubt it.  In a
few cases new
roads or motorways have resulted in former A-roads being given a new B
number by
the government itself.  I'd hesitate to buck the system in the UK even if I
found a
very exceptional case.  Especially as speed limits and lane counts could be
used
by routers to prefer a secondary route to a primary route in some
situations.

A map that highlighted roads in a way that conflicted with signage would be
somewhat
confusing.  Here we're used to the idea that a primary route is a better
choice than
a secondary route, all other things being equal.  If you're planning a
journey you look
at the primary routes first and maybe refine it a little by diverting onto
secondary routes
for part of the journey (actually you'd look at motorways first).

I’m all for recording these classes (we do it in ref in Germany and Italy),
> but they cannot be an argument in the individual case in favor of a
> specific osm highway class.
>

In the case of Germany, I agree.  In Germany it's not that simple.  From
what I've read
the number of digits indicates how important the road is.  Sort of.  There
are exceptions.
:(

-- 
Paul
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Classifying roads from Trunk to Tertiary and Unclassified

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 12. Aug 2019, at 16:38, Paul Allen  wrote:
> 
> may not be entirely
> predictable (especially if we don't have access to traffic statistics) and 
> the only objectively
> verifiable data we have is the signage. 


no, we also have our knowledge about the size and importance of the places that 
are connected, about right of way at crossings, road sections/size/surface 
quality, lanes, speed limits, „curvyness“, and we have an idea of traffic 
density (not as precise as true statistics maybe, but you usually have an 
idea), etc etc.



> If your country's government indicates with signs
> that a road as a primary route then that is what it is. 


no government says „primary“ road, they might say „A road“, or „Bundesstraße“ 
but the latter is only telling that the Federal government of Germany is in 
charge of the maintenance (i.e. it is somehow deemed to be important, but it 
doesn’t say _how_ important it is, because importance varies among 
Bundesstraßen, and it is only generally more important than a Kreisstraße 
(local connection road), while in a specific case it may be less important than 
a specific Kreisstraße.

I’m all for recording these classes (we do it in ref in Germany and Italy), but 
they cannot be an argument in the individual case in favor of a specific osm 
highway class.

Cheers Martin 
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Classifying roads from Trunk to Tertiary and Unclassified

[Paul Allen]

On Mon, 12 Aug 2019 at 15:31, Martin Koppenhoefer 
wrote:

>
> TL;DR;
> Just because you only see a simple system for road numbering on the ground
> (like motorway, national, regional, local) doesn’t mean your government
> doesn’t use much more complex mechanisms to plan, build and maintain roads
> and the road network.
>

Which is a brief summary of part of the point I made.  However, the other
part was that even if
all of those internal planning rules are available, the decisions made may
not be entirely
predictable (especially if we don't have access to traffic statistics) and
the only objectively
verifiable data we have is the signage.  If your country's government
indicates with signs
that a road as a primary route then that is what it is.  If your country
doesn't have official road
classifications then you'll have to use your judgement.

-- 
Paul
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Culverts

[Paul Allen]

On Mon, 12 Aug 2019 at 14:58, Ulrich Lamm  wrote:

>
> Some important OSM-menbers prefer ignorant mapping, producing a
> fragmentary presentation og waterways.
>

It's not about "ignorant" or "knowledgeable" mapping.  It never has been.
It's about
COPYRIGHT.

Does the copyright of the material you use give you permission to use it in
that way?  Using
Google Translate on https://wbv-trebel.wbv-mv.de/?page_id=97 I found my way
to
https://wbv-trebel.wbv-mv.de/?page_id=14 which says this:

The content and works on these pages created by the site operators are
subject to German copyright law. The duplication, processing, distribution
and any kind of exploitation outside the limits of copyright require the
written consent of the respective author or creator. Downloads and copies
of this site are for private, non-commercial use only. As far as the
contents on this side were not created by the operator, the copyrights of
third parties are considered. In particular contents of third parties are
marked as such. Should you still be aware of a copyright infringement, we
ask for a note. Upon notification of violations, we will remove such
content immediately.

If you use the information there to add things to OSM then you are
breaching the requirement that
you use that information for PRIVATE use ONLY.  And because OSM data is
used by
commercial offerings such as Mapbox, you are breaching the requirement that
you use that
copied information for NON-COMMERCIAL use ONLY.

This is not about a preference for "ignorant" mapping.  It never has been.
It is about
breaking the law.  It isn't just that a court would compel OSM to remove
your infringing data,
the court might compel OSM to pay damages.

I don't know if you are incapable of understanding that this is about
COPYRIGHT or you
merely pretend to be ignorant of it.  Until you show you are capable of
understanding
the issue of copyright and of complying with OSM's requirements to respect
the copyright
of others then people will keep reverting your changes and temporarily
banning you.
Your "knowledgeable" mapping is a liability to OSM, not an asset.

Actually, you seem to be interpreting objections to your use of copyright
source A as an
objection about source A, not about your use of copyright material in
general.  So you come
here to moan, and switch to copyright source B.  People then object to you
using copyright
source B, which your take as an objection about source B, not about your
use of copyright
material in general.  We're down to copyright source E or F now (that I
know of) and you
still haven't mastered the generalization that it is about your use of
COPYRIGHT material,
not about which source you're using.  To be honest, if I had the power
(it's probably a
good thing I don't) I'd have put a lifetime ban on you months ago because
you seem
incapable of understanding what you are doing wrong.

-- 
Paul
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Classifying roads from Trunk to Tertiary and Unclassified

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 12. Aug 2019, at 15:36, Paul Allen  wrote:
> 
> Where a country-wide classification exists, it is usual for this to be 
> reflected in the
> numbering scheme and the signage.  


people are often writing about this, but from the German situation, where I 
have been digging deeper, I can tell you that there is not just one 
classification with numbering scheme (this is what everyone can easily see on 
the ground, but it only reflects who is in charge of maintenance, and not the 
standards of the road). The scheme that is the more interesting and more in 
line with osm highway classes are the parameters used to decide on the layout 
and design the highway. They are looking at the importance of the connection, 
the function and the context, the rules are more complex and cannot be seen on 
the ground in the form of signs or numbers. Unfortunately these technical 
standards are not even publicly available for free, you would have to pay in 
order to get them.

I would expect many countries having similarly different systems, the 
signposted system of numbered routes, and a more detailed, internal system 
which is about the importance, function and resulting design and layout of the 
road.

There are a lot of standards, plans, etc. and the process to build a new road 
is quite complex (because besides technical requirements it also has to deal 
with politics like people living along the new road, funding, changing 
priorities or majorities during the planning and construction process, etc.), a 
long list of somehow road related standards in Germany can be found here for 
reference, and while it is mostly about technical details, there are also some 
more general documents listed:
  
https://de.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liste_der_technischen_Regelwerke_für_das_Straßenwesen_in_Deutschland


For the highway classes I would consider this the relevant standards/guidelines:
https://de.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richtlinien_für_integrierte_Netzgestaltung

(~guidelines for integrated network design)

You can get a glimpse into the table of contents here: 
http://www.fgsv-verlag.de/catalog/_pdf-files/121.i.pdf


TL;DR;
Just because you only see a simple system for road numbering on the ground 
(like motorway, national, regional, local) doesn’t mean your government doesn’t 
use much more complex mechanisms to plan, build and maintain roads and the road 
network.

Cheers Martin ___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

[Tagging] Culverts

[Ulrich Lamm]

In some parts of Germany, especially in the northern half of former DDR,
in the second half of 20th century hundreds of kilometers of previously openair 
dtches and streems have been laid into culverts.
To understand the waterways, which is finally understanding the landscape, 
these culverts have to be mapped, to see and show, where the water from 
remaining open ditches goes.

Some important OSM-menbers prefer ignorant mapping, producing a fragmentary 
presentation og waterways.
But ignorant mapping is no innocent mapping, it is almost the opposite of it. 
It is irresponsoble mapping.
For example, if the outlet of a lake is presented as one of its affluents 
(because most mappers do not follow a waterway up to its source and up to ist 
mouth), readers of osm-rendering maps are misleaded.
Of course, it has to be allowed to map a short section of a waterway, only, but 
somebody els of OSM community should accomplish that waterway, as soon as 
possible.

The readers of our maps have the right to get systematical information not only 
on the system of roads but also on the system of waterways.
OSM members who call systematical mapping "dispproved" (GER: "unerwünscht"), 
violate the interests of the real users.

Recently, one example of my systematical mapping has been criticized:

2019-08-10
Hallo ulamm,
letihu hinterließ einen Diskussionsbeitrag zu einem deiner Änderungssätze, 
erstellt am 2019-08-10 17:36:22 UTC mit der Bemerkung „bis zur Quelle“
Ein 492m langes Rohr neben der Straße? 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/667179290/history 
das kann doch keiner sauber halten.
Weitere Details über den Änderungssatz können gefunden werden unter 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/66767946.

2019-08-12
"Hallo ulamm,
streckenkundler hinterließ einen Diskussionsbeitrag zu einem deiner 
Änderungssätze, erstellt am 2019-08-12 06:24:13 UTC mit der Bemerkung „bis zur 
Quelle“
Ja, Das war eines von extrem vielen seltsamen und eigensinnigen Erfassungen 
entgegen der Standards von ulamm, die oft nicht nachweisbar oder aus 
zweifelfaften Quellen stammten. Normalerweise müssen alle Edits von ihm 
revertet werden... siehe auch: 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/2925 
Sven
Weitere Details über den Änderungssatz können gefunden werden unter 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/66767946.";

As a protagonist of ignorant mapping of waterways has banned me for my 
systematical mapping,
I cannot answer in the discssion of the changeset.
So I answer here.

Look at the website of the maintaining corporation, the WBV Trebel
https://wbv-trebel.wbv-mv.de/?page_id=97
"WBV Trebel, Grimmen – Unsere Verbandsgewässer"
and click on "Schaubezirk 6 Roter Bürckengraben / Ibitz"
On that map you can find the places "Leyerhof" and "Borgstedt"
and the waterway running westward from the fields north of Borgstedt to the 
small road
and then as a culvert along the road, until it turns westward, again.  

Best regards
Ulrich
   ___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Classifying roads from Trunk to Tertiary and Unclassified

[Paul Allen]

On Mon, 12 Aug 2019 at 14:07, Martin Koppenhoefer 
wrote:

>
> if I don’t interpret this wrong, in Germany and Italy we are using the
> motorroad=yes qualifier for what appears to be called autovia in Spain
> (motorway like access restrictions).


Sounds about right.  Wikipedia's generic term for
motorways/freeways/autobahns etc. is
"Controlled access highway".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controlled-access_highway


> We are further using highway=trunk for all roads that are similar to
> motorways (no grade level intersections, ramps) but are not legally
> motorways. trunk and motorroad are orthogonal properties/classes.
>

Having looked further into it, the Spanish autovias most often resemble
what we in the UK
call "dual carriageways" in construction and legal constraints.  Dual
carriageways are usually
trunk roads here.

When it comes to lesser roads, the distinction between primary and
secondary isn't solely
about width, straightness, number of junctions, etc. but also depends upon
other
considerations such as whether or not there are alternative routes, the
size of the places
they connect, etc.  The way in which those factors are balanced by
bureaucrats is somewhat
opaque.  There may be secondary roads connecting unimportant locations that
are as good
as, or even better than, some primary roads.

Where a country-wide classification exists, it is usual for this to be
reflected in the
numbering scheme and the signage.  In the UK it may not be readily apparent
whether
a road is a trunk or a primary since they'll both be "A" roads with the
same style of
signage, but there's an obvious difference in signage between A roads and B
roads, and
between either of those and motorways.  It's not just the letter
designating them, but
also the colour and shape of signs that distinguishes them.

In a country where the government has classified roads in this way, it
doesn't seem like
a good idea for mappers to use their own subjective judgement to decide
which road is
a primary and a secondary.  The bureaucrats have traffic statistics that we
do not.  And
even if the bureaucrats are wrong (by some objective standard), the fact is
that all the
signage reflects what the bureaucrats say and not what one of us happens to
think.

A tagging scheme that doesn't reflect the signage seems to me to be somewhat
sub-optimal.  Especially when we can add tags for number of lanes, speed
limits,
etc. that allow routers to make more refined decisions than relying only on
the
road classification.

-- 
Paul
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Classifying roads from Trunk to Tertiary and Unclassified

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 12. Aug 2019, at 12:32, Paul Allen  wrote:
> 
> From what I've found (which may be wrong or I've misinterpreted it) 
> autopistas are
> highway=motorway.  Autovias are harder to categorize, but seem to be 
> theoretically
> highway=trunk even though in practise some of the newer autovias seem
> indistinguishable from highway=motorway in terms of construction and traffic
> regulations.


if I don’t interpret this wrong, in Germany and Italy we are using the 
motorroad=yes qualifier for what appears to be called autovia in Spain 
(motorway like access restrictions). We are further using highway=trunk for all 
roads that are similar to motorways (no grade level intersections, ramps) but 
are not legally motorways. trunk and motorroad are orthogonal 
properties/classes.

Cheers Martin 
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Classifying roads from Trunk to Tertiary and Unclassified

[Paul Allen]

On Mon, 12 Aug 2019 at 01:20, yo paseopor  wrote:

>
> trunk: 4,3,2-lane new roads (newer than twenty years, with new track),
> with only interlevel crossings and exits, average speed of 80/100, and wide
> lanes. It is possible bikes or agricultural vehicles would be prohibited in
> these kind of ways.
>

Those sound like highway=motorway to me.  However, I'm not sure what you
mean by
interlevel crossings and exits.  But if they really are trunks rather than
motorways, from what
I've found in a brief search, Spain does have motorways but your scheme
doesn't mention
them.

>From what I've found (which may be wrong or I've misinterpreted it)
autopistas are
highway=motorway.  Autovias are harder to categorize, but seem to be
theoretically
highway=trunk even though in practise some of the newer autovias seem
indistinguishable from highway=motorway in terms of construction and traffic
regulations.

-- 
Paul
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging