Re: [Talk-us] Separate relations for each direction of US & State highways.

2013-11-17 Thread Mike N

On 11/17/2013 5:55 PM, Minh Nguyen wrote:


I don't think it's a good idea to automatically remove symbol=.


 +1 - as a manually added tag, removing the tag would be destroying 
hand-acquired data.   And just because a known shield renderer doesn't 
use it today, doesn't mean future renderers might not find it useful.



___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us


Re: [Talk-us] Separate relations for each direction of US & State highways.

2013-11-17 Thread Minh Nguyen

On 07:47 2013-11-17, Richard Welty wrote:

perhaps symbol can go on the list of tags that editors remove automagically.


I don't think it's a good idea to automatically remove symbol=. Even 
though in the U.S. we've been using it mostly for URLs to Wikimedia 
Commons images, the wiki [1] suggests that symbol= is used elsewhere 
(and for non-motor routes) to provide human-readable descriptions of 
symbols, while osmc:symbol= is for parseable values and wiki:symbol= is 
for Commons file names.


[1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:symbol

--
Minh Nguyen 
Jabber: m...@1ec5.org; Blog: http://notes.1ec5.org/


___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us


Re: [Talk-us] Advice On Data Removal Problem

2013-11-17 Thread Serge Wroclawski
On Sat, Nov 16, 2013 at 8:46 PM, Greg Morgan  wrote:
> So there is a fairly new mapper in the Phoenix area removing valid data.  I
> would like advice on what to do.  I don't to want dampen this mapper's
> efforts.  However, another mapper has complained to me about the problem as
> this mapper has removed both of our work.  Change set
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/18867333 is an example where
> CartoCrazy even uses a change set description of "Cleaned up clutter of
> pedestrian crossing markers,..."  I am all for data revisions but this is an
> example of vandalism where the mapper doesn't realize that highway crossings
> are valid map data.  The damage isn't limited to highway crossings.

If you've asked the mapper ans he hasn't replied back, then you can
send a report to the DWG to investigate- that's their job. Just email
d...@osmfoundation.org

- Serge

___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us


Re: [Talk-us] Separate relations for each direction of US & State highways.

2013-11-17 Thread Richard Welty
On 11/17/13 10:30 AM, James Mast wrote:
>
> Also, on a side note, do you guys think we should remove the "symbol"
> tags in the relations from all the Interstates/US highways they show
> up in at the same time?
not sure what i think about the relation splitting idea. but i do agree
that the
symbol tags can go away as they're not going to be used for shield
rendering.

perhaps symbol can go on the list of tags that editors remove automagically.

richard



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us


[Talk-us] Separate relations for each direction of US & State highways.

2013-11-17 Thread James Mast
I'm just curious, but what's everybody's opinion on this?  I know it's 
acceptable for the Interstates (some are setup this way, some aren't) since 
they are all divided, but what about for US Highways and State Highways?  I 
know that we want to eventually have the cardinal directions in OSM for the 
routers so they can properly tell people which direction the of the highway 
they need to turn onto (like turn left onto Westbound US-30).

So, how do we do this and also how do we let people know that aren't part of 
talk-us about any possible change so that relations don't get broken after 
they've been converted into separate directions?  I mean, we can turn the 
current state relations for a highway into a "super" relation for each state 
once we create a new relation for each direction.  Also how are we going to 
name each relation?  Something like this:

US 48 (WV - eastbound)
US 48 (WV - westbound)
US 48 (WV - super)

Plus we can't forget to add in the "direction=*" tag in the relations as well 
as the "role" area (or should we just use "forward" there or even tag nothing 
there, and leave the direction in the tag area) as we can't expect the routers 
to get the direction info from the "name" tag.

So for detecting relations that get broken after they've been converted (we 
should do all the Interstates first, then US highways, and then State 
highways), we need a way to let dedicated mappers know when they've been broken 
(aka, a "gap") so they can be fixed quickly.  An idea of having a something 
automatically annalizing the relations whenever they are modified, kinda like 
the "OSM Relation Analyzer" [1], would work best IMO.  Except with this 
analyzer, it produces a RSS feed that will let people subscribed to it know 
that there is a broken relation that needs to be repaired.  And once it's been 
fixed, it will send out a new post on the feed saying that the relation no 
longer has a gap so people who see the feed later know it's been already fixed 
and don't waste their time checking to see if it has been fixed.  And the feeds 
would be separate based on the network type.  One for all Interstates (this 
would include the Business Interstates), one for US Highways (including the 
bannered US highways), and one for each of the 50 state highway networks.  That 
way, you can then just subscribe to the RSS feeds that you'd want to pay 
attention to only instead of being flooded with updates from every highway 
system in one feed.

If you guys want, later today, I could do a test US highway in this setup.  I 
would recommend US-48 in WV/VA as it's one of the shorter US Highways out 
there, plus it mostly a divided highway in WV as it's been built that way and I 
think it's completely un-divided in VA.

Also, on a side note, do you guys think we should remove the "symbol" tags in 
the relations from all the Interstates/US highways they show up in at the same 
time?

So, let's get this discussion going!

-James (rickmastfan67)

[1] - http://ra.osmsurround.org/analyzeRelation?relationId=455420
  ___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us