Re: [OSM-talk] path or byway ?
Hi, On Sat, Jul 19, 2008 at 06:13:39PM +0100, David Earl wrote: They are universally rural. They are tracks, yes, but formally public whereas a track will typically be associated with a farm ore similar. Mostly rural, but not all. There are two in Loughborough that I am aware of - one Cross Hill Lane: http://informationfreeway.org/?lat=52.756383670302455lon=-1.2154373874651676zoom=17layers=B000F000F The other unnamed, but just labelled as byway open to all traffic - on the edge of town, and rather useless as after a while it turns into a private road, no turning room. http://informationfreeway.org/?lat=52.75253955766346lon=-1.2367663089318803zoom=17layers=B000F000F Both are surfaced, and once would have been in the country, of course (like most old roads!). There are many in Suffolk, some tracks, others surfaced, such as http://informationfreeway.org/?lat=52.23996492630855lon=1.0154108416754053zoom=17layers=B000F000F where Swilltub Lane (going North) is a restricted byway, but you can only walk down it as it's all overgrown (in the last 30-40 years or so). Hundred Lane (going East from Swilltub Lane) is a BOAT but indestinguishable from any unclassified road (which it is to the West) apart from a sign saying byway. Byways should be signed in theory, just like a footpath, but might not be of course. Anything labelled RUPP[1] is now a byway, since about 2006 (sadly, in my opinion - it's nice to have some strange historic stuff around sometimes). There's an (ex-)RUPP in grey here: http://informationfreeway.org/?lat=52.23587828332072lon=0.988159603986547zoom=17layers=B000F000F I usually label with something like uk:row=B.O.A.T., or similar, at least before highway=byway (oxymoron=true? ;-) ) started to be used. Cheers, -- Matthew [1] Road used as a public path ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] path or byway ?
Thanks for all replies. After a parallel discussion in the french ML, I would say that we will probably not use it as it sounds too much UK specific. Perhaps it's also a misunderstanding from my part that the wiki Map Features is the international wiki page but, in fact, is the UK map features page. Pieren On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 6:46 PM, Bruce Cowan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sat, 2008-07-19 at 01:48 +0100, 80n wrote: More technically, it's an English and Welsh thing. AFAIK, Scotland doesn't have these (we may do, but our access laws are very liberal). ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] path or byway ?
Hi, Perhaps it's also a misunderstanding from my part that the wiki Map Features is the international wiki page but, in fact, is the UK map features page. No, that is a misunderstanding also. The Map Features page is where *all* widely used tags get documented (plus a few others). If you have a tag that is widely used in France you're welcome to put that on Map Features even if people in the UK are unlikely to use it and vice versa. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail [EMAIL PROTECTED] ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] path or byway ?
From: Pieren [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 18 July 2008 22:14:32 BDT To: talk@openstreetmap.org Subject: [OSM-talk] path or byway ? Dear talk, Could some native english speaker explain the difference between highway=path and highway=byway recently introduced in map features ? The description is not obvious. Is it unpaved / paved ? Where is the limit between path-byway and byway-unclassified ? regards Pieren As I understand it, a byway (which may be yet another of the UK- oriented map features) is normally an old road or lane which probably was once well used by foot traffic, horses, carts, coaches, whatever, but was not adopted as part of the modern road network. They are often known in Britain as green roads because they have not been maintained and rarely have much or any surface left, being generally dirt, stones, grass, weeds and mud. They are distinguished from paths and bridleways (another British thing?) by still being rights of way for all/any traffic and so tend to be popular with the off-road community with their 4x4s, quad bikes and scramblers. These things tend to make the byways rutted and muddier and upset the walkers and mountain bikers (the latter also upsetting the walkers) so that local authorities get pressured into placing local restrictions on some byways. Enough detail? (I could drone on for hours). elvin ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] path or byway ?
What exactly are we trying to achieve with highway=byway? I can think of two possible uses but both seem to have unresolved issues. The first is simply to record that a particular way exists and has certain access rights. In this instance I don't see highway=byway being any different to highway=track, foot=yes, bicycle=yes, horse=yes, motorcycle=yes, motorcar=yes and the latter would probably make more sense to non-uk people. The second is to record the exact legal classification of the way as a byway rather than another entity with similar access permissions e.g. a Green Lane (marked with green dots on OS maps with the key: Other routes with public access). In this case the current practise of tagging motorcar=no to indicate a restricted byway is insufficient as this afternoon I walked along a BOAT that had also had a traffic order preventing use by motorcars. I'm personally starting to favour tagging byways as highway=track with the appropriate access permissions in the same way that the map features page now defines highway=footpath as highway=path, foot=yes. The only issue I can see is that we would need to add a horsedrawn access tag to differentiate between bridleways and restricted byways. I have to say I agree 100% with this, though I think we need to reach a consensus before changing the way we tag. Nick ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] path or byway ?
Nick Whitelegg wrote: Sent: 21 July 2008 10:29 AM To: Andy Street Cc: talk@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] path or byway ? What exactly are we trying to achieve with highway=byway? I can think of two possible uses but both seem to have unresolved issues. The first is simply to record that a particular way exists and has certain access rights. In this instance I don't see highway=byway being any different to highway=track, foot=yes, bicycle=yes, horse=yes, motorcycle=yes, motorcar=yes and the latter would probably make more sense to non-uk people. The second is to record the exact legal classification of the way as a byway rather than another entity with similar access permissions e.g. a Green Lane (marked with green dots on OS maps with the key: Other routes with public access). In this case the current practise of tagging motorcar=no to indicate a restricted byway is insufficient as this afternoon I walked along a BOAT that had also had a traffic order preventing use by motorcars. I'm personally starting to favour tagging byways as highway=track with the appropriate access permissions in the same way that the map features page now defines highway=footpath as highway=path, foot=yes. The only issue I can see is that we would need to add a horsedrawn access tag to differentiate between bridleways and restricted byways. I have to say I agree 100% with this, though I think we need to reach a consensus before changing the way we tag. Nick We've debated this many many times. I fu*kd up with the original map features list by not describing the physical and administrative aspects of a feature separately. These questions probably would not keep cropping up if I had. Anyway, my take is that we should think more of the generic tagging as representing the physical, that's what people can see on the ground and means its not necessary to think or know about the administrative aspects. This is what we do mostly anyway, its just that in the UK we conveniently tidy both up in a single tag when we do something like highway=motorway. If the byway is a track I feel it should be highway=track and then with the extra byway=true. In that way the physical and administrative are separate and easily understood. Whether we would ever want to split motorways into highway=highway and motorway=true of not I really don't know. In reality it just adds work that's not needed when we all understand what highway=motorway means. Cheers Andy ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] path or byway ?
On Sat, 2008-07-19 at 01:48 +0100, 80n wrote: In the case of the OSM definition of highway=byway, it corresponds exactly to the UK definition of a byway (or more precisely Byway Open to All Traffic). More technically, it's an English and Welsh thing. AFAIK, Scotland doesn't have these (we may do, but our access laws are very liberal). -- Bruce Cowan [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] path or byway ?
I forgot the discussion in December (which was more about voting or not voting ;-). It's clear when I read the following description from Nick W. [1]: - Byway (highway=byway) is an unsurfaced track oops. highway=unsurfaced has been removed from Map Features. It has been replaced by highway=track and/or surface=. What is the limit between highway=byway and highway=track ? Yes if I read [1] but no if I read the wikipedia definition: - Byway (road), a minor secondary or tertiary road in the UK [2] But it seems that germans will to not use it ([3] and [4]) (I'm also waiting the translation of byway in german to see their interpretation). The descriptions in Map Features are used by many countries (directly or for translations). New entries should be carefully documented. Pieren [1] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2007-December/021047.html [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byway [3] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2007-December/021050.html [4] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/De:Germany_roads_tagging On Sat, Jul 19, 2008 at 2:13 AM, Frederik Ramm [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2007-December/021047.html ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] path or byway ?
Message: 9 Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2008 18:54:51 -0500 From: Alex Mauer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] path or byway ? To: talk@openstreetmap.org Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Pieren wrote: Dear talk, Could some native english speaker explain the difference between highway=path and highway=byway recently introduced in map features ? For one, byway was never proposed or described or otherwise documented, but instead just plopped into map features. So I guess no one really knows except Richard B, who put it there. -Alex Mauer hawke I only added it because it was already; 1. In use: see http://etricceline.de/osm/Great_britain/En/tagstats_highway=byway.htm 2. Rendered on both Mapnik and [EMAIL PROTECTED] Also, it was already documented on the wiki here; http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/UK_public_rights_of_way If it's already in reasonably widespread use - and will render, then we should be adding these to Map Features - people are voting by using the tags. Richard ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] path or byway ?
What is the limit between highway=byway and highway=track ? Byway is an official byway (a certain class of right of way in the UK), or, if motorcar=no added, a restricted byway. A highway=track is any other type of track - you can use the foot/horse/bicycle tags to describe precisely what sort of traffic is allowed on it. See http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/UK_Countryside_mapping This is UK based but the principles could potentially apply anywhere. Arguably, a highway=byway could be used internationally for any track in the countryside which motor vehicles are permitted on. Nick ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] path or byway ?
There's the informal word byway as in the English phrase highways and byways which you would indeed say is a minor road as per wikipedia, but there are also formal byways. In many parts of England these are actually signposted with a finger post which simply says Byway or Public byway. e.g. http://www.camcycle.org.uk/map/data/original/lle000.192947n52.164140a002m045o_20051224_125455.jpg I know this signing is common in Cambridgeshire and Norfolk, so it is highly appropriate to tag it as such when you have the evidence on the ground to support it. They are universally rural. They are tracks, yes, but formally public whereas a track will typically be associated with a farm ore similar. Most would once have allowed motor vehicles, but in many cases these have now been restricted (I found one the other day which was only restricted in winter: http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=52.16718lon=-0.08336zoom=16layers=B00FTF ) As someone else said, it it isn't relevant in your country, don't use the tag. David On 19/07/2008 11:59, Pieren wrote: I forgot the discussion in December (which was more about voting or not voting ;-). It's clear when I read the following description from Nick W. [1]: - Byway (highway=byway) is an unsurfaced track oops. highway=unsurfaced has been removed from Map Features. It has been replaced by highway=track and/or surface=. What is the limit between highway=byway and highway=track ? Yes if I read [1] but no if I read the wikipedia definition: - Byway (road), a minor secondary or tertiary road in the UK [2] But it seems that germans will to not use it ([3] and [4]) (I'm also waiting the translation of byway in german to see their interpretation). The descriptions in Map Features are used by many countries (directly or for translations). New entries should be carefully documented. Pieren [1] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2007-December/021047.html [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byway [3] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2007-December/021050.html [4] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/De:Germany_roads_tagging On Sat, Jul 19, 2008 at 2:13 AM, Frederik Ramm [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2007-December/021047.html ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] path or byway ?
On Sat, 2008-07-19 at 16:35 +0100, Nick Whitelegg wrote: What is the limit between highway=byway and highway=track ? Byway is an official byway (a certain class of right of way in the UK), or, if motorcar=no added, a restricted byway. A highway=track is any other type of track - you can use the foot/horse/bicycle tags to describe precisely what sort of traffic is allowed on it. What exactly are we trying to achieve with highway=byway? I can think of two possible uses but both seem to have unresolved issues. The first is simply to record that a particular way exists and has certain access rights. In this instance I don't see highway=byway being any different to highway=track, foot=yes, bicycle=yes, horse=yes, motorcycle=yes, motorcar=yes and the latter would probably make more sense to non-uk people. The second is to record the exact legal classification of the way as a byway rather than another entity with similar access permissions e.g. a Green Lane (marked with green dots on OS maps with the key: Other routes with public access). In this case the current practise of tagging motorcar=no to indicate a restricted byway is insufficient as this afternoon I walked along a BOAT that had also had a traffic order preventing use by motorcars. I'm personally starting to favour tagging byways as highway=track with the appropriate access permissions in the same way that the map features page now defines highway=footpath as highway=path, foot=yes. The only issue I can see is that we would need to add a horsedrawn access tag to differentiate between bridleways and restricted byways. Regards, Andy ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] path or byway ?
Dear talk, Could some native english speaker explain the difference between highway=path and highway=byway recently introduced in map features ? The description is not obvious. Is it unpaved / paved ? Where is the limit between path-byway and byway-unclassified ? regards Pieren ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] path or byway ?
Pieren wrote: Dear talk, Could some native english speaker explain the difference between highway=path and highway=byway recently introduced in map features ? For one, byway was never proposed or described or otherwise documented, but instead just plopped into map features. So I guess no one really knows except Richard B, who put it there. -Alex Mauer hawke ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] path or byway ?
Hi, Could some native english speaker explain the difference between highway=path and highway=byway recently introduced in map features ? For one, byway was never proposed or described or otherwise documented, but instead just plopped into map features. Just like them darn motorways... nobody ever put them to vote, it's a shame ;-) So I guess no one really knows except Richard B, who put it there. There are probably a few more millions who know what a byway is. In contrast to the generic term path, a byway is something very specific in the UK because it has a legal meaning. The question has been asked and answered a number of times on the lists, e.g. here: http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2007-December/021047.html Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail [EMAIL PROTECTED] ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] path or byway ?
Frederik Ramm wrote: For one, byway was never proposed or described or otherwise documented, but instead just plopped into map features. Just like them darn motorways... nobody ever put them to vote, it's a shame ;-) Except that motorways were there on the very first rev (ok, second) of Map Features. And they're documented. And conceptually they're not UK-specific. My gripe is that it was put in there with neither discussion nor description; I never mentioned anything about voting. There are probably a few more millions who know what a byway is. In contrast to the generic term path, a byway is something very specific in the UK because it has a legal meaning. You are aware that the OSM definitions of things and the UK legal definitions of things are not always the same, right? -Alex Mauer hawke ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] path or byway ?
On Sat, Jul 19, 2008 at 1:40 AM, Alex Mauer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Frederik Ramm wrote: For one, byway was never proposed or described or otherwise documented, but instead just plopped into map features. Just like them darn motorways... nobody ever put them to vote, it's a shame ;-) Except that motorways were there on the very first rev (ok, second) of Map Features. And they're documented. And conceptually they're not UK-specific. My gripe is that it was put in there with neither discussion nor description; I never mentioned anything about voting. There are probably a few more millions who know what a byway is. In contrast to the generic term path, a byway is something very specific in the UK because it has a legal meaning. You are aware that the OSM definitions of things and the UK legal definitions of things are not always the same, right? In the case of the OSM definition of highway=byway, it corresponds exactly to the UK definition of a byway (or more precisely Byway Open to All Traffic). If it doesn't float your boat (pun intended) then don't use it. 80n -Alex Mauer hawke ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
