Re: [talk-au] 4WD only tags
Hi David, although my opinion is that most render's try to simplify the the stylesheet so the map for ease of comprehension and would not make use of these additional attributes, I see your point and agree that it's useful data to have. Since my company focuses on 4WD maps and navigation, we will certainly take full advantage of this. BTW, do you have the link to the proposal page? Will go and cast a vote. Li. On 04/11/2012, at 2:41 PM, David Bannon wrote: Li, I beg to differ. While I agree that grading of a 4x4 track is subjective, so is much of the other data in the OSM database. Must be that way. The real issue is how important the data is. As I have mentioned, I am concerned that maps are being rendered that ignore this data. Routing engines are potentially sending people down roads that they, and their vehicles are ill suited to. Bad things will definitely happen. The routing people are saying but these tags don't even show on the OSM maps, why should we worry ?. And as to subjective, while there will always be borderline cases, I don't think it would be too hard to divide tracks up into - * 4x4 recommended - you will might be OK in a conventional car or (better still) an SUV but you have been warned. * 4x4 required - you really need a stock 4x4, a real one with (eg) low ratio. * 4x4 extreme - this is for the death or glory boys, they need experience and modified vehicles. This is a recent addition ! I am pretty sure that if you and I spent a couple of weeks having some driving fun, we'd agree on the vast majority of the tracks we graded. David - Original Message - From: Li Xia lisxia1...@gmail.com To: David Bannon dban...@internode.on.net Cc: OSM Australian Talk List talk-au@openstreetmap.org Sent: Sun, 4 Nov 2012 13:08:22 +1100 Subject: 4WD only tags Hi David, just my 2 cents on 4WD_only tags. By adding a 4x4 recommended tag will add to the complexity because it's kind of subjective as to which roads/tracks are traversable in a 2WD vehicle, therefor adding another option for this key will further complicate the issue. Li. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] NSW Alphanumeric routes
The NSW RTA has a web site up on the new alphanumeric routes, including maps of the new routes. www.rta.nsw.gov.au/roadprojects/projects/alpha_numeric/index.html I was wondering when we should update the route numbers to the new routes. Some have already been done, e.g. A41 (Bathurst to Albury via Mid Western and Olympic Highways) - the road signs for this went up several years ago (although some have since been coverplated). I am thinking that some would definitely be OK to do now (e.g. convert NR 32 (Great Western/Mitchell/Barrier Highways) to A32, as the number is similar) I'm not so sure about updating some other routes (e.g. Oxley Highway NR 34 becomes B56, Snowy Mountains Highway NR 18 becomes B72) - as the numbers are different, are these best left until the route number signs change on the ground? (Also, are we allowed to use the RTA web site as a source for an ODBL database like OSM?) Mark P. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] traffic lights on dual carriageway intersections
By choosing to place traffic light not on the intersection node, you are failing to represent that this is an intersection of two roads, controlled by traffic signals. I don't see how it is failing to represent that - the intersection is there (the ways intersect at nodes), and there are traffic signals *before* the intersection (not smack-bang in the middle of the intersection) Instead you are choosing to represent There is a stop line here and traffic signal and further on there is an intersection. - but isn't that EXACTLY what we have - a stop line with a traffic signal, with an intersection further on ? - and if we were REALLY keen, the same *could* be done for single carriage way intersections (but I'm not suggesting that that is a sensible option) Ian ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] traffic lights on dual carriageway intersections
On 4 November 2012 20:58, Ian Steer ianst...@iinet.net.au wrote: By choosing to place traffic light not on the intersection node, you are failing to represent that this is an intersection of two roads, controlled by traffic signals. I don't see how it is failing to represent that - the intersection is there (the ways intersect at nodes), and there are traffic signals *before* the intersection (not smack-bang in the middle of the intersection) Because our current schema indicates that an intesection is controlled by signals by placing the traffic signals on the intersecting node. Traffic lights do occur before intersections or the immediate vicinity without controlling traffic movements through that intersection. It is a meaningful respresentation. In many North American cities the signals hang right in the centre of the intersection. Are you saying these should be mapped differently just because the lights are located in a different location? As far as the road user is concerned, they are the same. They don't care where the traffic signals are - they care there are lights at the corner of 6th and Vine. - and if we were REALLY keen, the same *could* be done for single carriage way intersections (but I'm not suggesting that that is a sensible option) Exactly. This is the clincher. Why on earth would you develop a schema that is only relevant to dual carriageways? When there is a schema that can respresent stop lines, signal locations, and intersection control across all junctions then I'm in. Until then, trying to vary the current schema in a way that is both ambigious, and only works for dual carriageways just doesn't fly, IMO. Ian. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] NSW Alphanumeric routes
Hi, The timetable for this rollout is from January to December 2013. So, if we do this now we could be making changes over a year before the signs change. I say, lets just wait for the implementation. I have faith in OSM to make the changes within a day of the coverplates being removed, and then the copyright issues don't come into play either, and navigation always corresponds to the signs. I also noticed on the RTA site a while back, they were saying that they were trying to work with map and data providers to provide timely and accurate updates. It certainly may be worthwhile sending them an email to see if we can take advantage of that, especially if we can get a timetable for the coverplate removal. Ian. On 4 November 2012 20:48, Mark Pulley mrpul...@lizzy.com.au wrote: The NSW RTA has a web site up on the new alphanumeric routes, including maps of the new routes. www.rta.nsw.gov.au/roadprojects/projects/alpha_numeric/index.html I was wondering when we should update the route numbers to the new routes. Some have already been done, e.g. A41 (Bathurst to Albury via Mid Western and Olympic Highways) - the road signs for this went up several years ago (although some have since been coverplated). I am thinking that some would definitely be OK to do now (e.g. convert NR 32 (Great Western/Mitchell/Barrier Highways) to A32, as the number is similar) I'm not so sure about updating some other routes (e.g. Oxley Highway NR 34 becomes B56, Snowy Mountains Highway NR 18 becomes B72) - as the numbers are different, are these best left until the route number signs change on the ground? (Also, are we allowed to use the RTA web site as a source for an ODBL database like OSM?) Mark P. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] 4WD only tags
Thanks Li, I have not put that proposal up yet, waiting on a response to a related matter. Soon. And when I do, I'll not be wanting just your vote, it will be your input I will really need ! Maybe I should put a draft up on my personal page while we wait ? David - Original Message - From: Li Xia To:David Bannon Cc:OSM Australian Talk List Sent:Sun, 4 Nov 2012 20:37:52 +1100 Subject:Re: 4WD only tags Hi David, although my opinion is that most render's try to simplify the the stylesheet so the map for ease of comprehension and would not make use of these additional attributes, I see your point and agree that it's useful data to have. Since my company focuses on 4WD maps and navigation, we will certainly take full advantage of this. BTW, do you have the link to the proposal page? Will go and cast a vote. Li. On 04/11/2012, at 2:41 PM, David Bannon wrote: Li, I beg to differ. While I agree that grading of a 4x4 track is subjective, so is much of the other data in the OSM database. Must be that way. The real issue is how important the data is. As I have mentioned, I am concerned that maps are being rendered that ignore this data. Routing engines are potentially sending people down roads that they, and their vehicles are ill suited to. Bad things will definitely happen. The routing people are saying but these tags don't even show on the OSM maps, why should we worry ?. And as to subjective, while there will always be borderline cases, I don't think it would be too hard to divide tracks up into - * 4x4 recommended - you will might be OK in a conventional car or (better still) an SUV but you have been warned. * 4x4 required - you really need a stock 4x4, a real one with (eg) low ratio. * 4x4 extreme - this is for the death or glory boys, they need experience and modified vehicles. This is a recent addition ! I am pretty sure that if you and I spent a couple of weeks having some driving fun, we'd agree on the vast majority of the tracks we graded. David - Original Message - From: Li Xia To:David Bannon Cc:OSM Australian Talk List Sent:Sun, 4 Nov 2012 13:08:22 +1100 Subject:4WD only tags Hi David, just my 2 cents on 4WD_only tags. By adding a 4x4 recommended tag will add to the complexity because it's kind of subjective as to which roads/tracks are traversable in a 2WD vehicle, therefor adding another option for this key will further complicate the issue. Li. Links: -- [1] mailto:lisxia1...@gmail.com [2] mailto:dban...@internode.on.net [3] mailto:talk-au@openstreetmap.org ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] traffic lights on dual carriageway intersections
Ian Steer wrote I think this is good because no matter which way you go through the intersection, you only pass one set of lights (rather than 2 if they were placed on the actual intersecting nodes). Couldn't a smart traffic light counter detect dual carrageways and just add a single signal, same as the exit counter does for roundabouts? Nick ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Preparing to map.
Sorry folks, I was having too much fun in Port Macquarie and only got to map for a short while. I did some roads near the racecourse although most of these were never named in OSM before. On my returm trip I will make a more determined effort to re-map the rest of Port Macquarie. I have made a decent start to mapping the Gold Coast and I'll do some more today hopefully. Cheers Nick ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] 4WD only tags
No probs david, and you'll be getting plenty of input from me, watch out ;-) A draft would be great. Let me know when it's ready to review. Li. On 05/11/2012, at 9:10 AM, David Bannon wrote: Thanks Li, I have not put that proposal up yet, waiting on a response to a related matter. Soon. And when I do, I'll not be wanting just your vote, it will be your input I will really need ! Maybe I should put a draft up on my personal page while we wait ? David - Original Message - From: Li Xia lisxia1...@gmail.com To: David Bannon dban...@internode.on.net Cc: OSM Australian Talk List talk-au@openstreetmap.org Sent: Sun, 4 Nov 2012 20:37:52 +1100 Subject: Re: 4WD only tags Hi David, although my opinion is that most render's try to simplify the the stylesheet so the map for ease of comprehension and would not make use of these additional attributes, I see your point and agree that it's useful data to have. Since my company focuses on 4WD maps and navigation, we will certainly take full advantage of this. BTW, do you have the link to the proposal page? Will go and cast a vote. Li. On 04/11/2012, at 2:41 PM, David Bannon wrote: Li, I beg to differ. While I agree that grading of a 4x4 track is subjective, so is much of the other data in the OSM database. Must be that way. The real issue is how important the data is. As I have mentioned, I am concerned that maps are being rendered that ignore this data. Routing engines are potentially sending people down roads that they, and their vehicles are ill suited to. Bad things will definitely happen. The routing people are saying but these tags don't even show on the OSM maps, why should we worry ?. And as to subjective, while there will always be borderline cases, I don't think it would be too hard to divide tracks up into - * 4x4 recommended - you will might be OK in a conventional car or (better still) an SUV but you have been warned. * 4x4 required - you really need a stock 4x4, a real one with (eg) low ratio. * 4x4 extreme - this is for the death or glory boys, they need experience and modified vehicles. This is a recent addition ! I am pretty sure that if you and I spent a couple of weeks having some driving fun, we'd agree on the vast majority of the tracks we graded. David - Original Message - From: Li Xia lisxia1...@gmail.com To: David Bannon dban...@internode.on.net Cc: OSM Australian Talk List talk-au@openstreetmap.org Sent: Sun, 4 Nov 2012 13:08:22 +1100 Subject: 4WD only tags Hi David, just my 2 cents on 4WD_only tags. By adding a 4x4 recommended tag will add to the complexity because it's kind of subjective as to which roads/tracks are traversable in a 2WD vehicle, therefor adding another option for this key will further complicate the issue. Li. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
