Re: [Talk-us] US highway tagging (was Re: highway shields: get your kicks, where?)

2011-01-06 Thread Paul Johnson
On 01/05/2011 09:50 AM, Richard Weait wrote:

 I have nothing against the die-cut style of US shield, but the ones
 I see posted on the roads 'round here have the black rectangular
 background.  I think CA still uses the die-cut shield.  Do others?

Oregon and Oklahoma do in some cases, but not others; age doesn't seem
to be a factor.  Haven't figured out the pattern to it yet...




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


Re: [Talk-us] US highway tagging (was Re: highway shields: get your kicks, where?)

2011-01-06 Thread Paul Johnson
On 01/04/2011 06:13 AM, Richard Welty wrote:
 On 1/4/11 3:18 AM, Paul Johnson wrote:
 On 01/03/2011 10:08 AM, Nathan Edgars II wrote:

 Also, is it now correct to not tag (network, ref) the individual
 ways that
 are part of a route relation? What about name? Is it correct to
 remove
 those existing tags from the ways (and ensure they are on the
 relation)? I'm
 not talking about a large-scale bot update, but as long as I'm
 editing them
 for some other reason anyway.
 No, it's not correct to remove refs from ways.
 I really would like to hear wider input on this, still, as it really
 doesn't make sense to waste the way's ref tag for refs that don't belong
 to the way, but the route that uses the way...

 rendering engines haven't, by and large, shifted over to using ref tags
 on the relations. while i think they should, i also don't think we ought to
 cause the massive level of breakage that would ensue if they just got
 removed.

Well, shields or not, we should really work on getting the existing
rendering over to relations (overriding way-based refs for route
rendering purposes) already...seems like we've been talking about this
simple basic first step for over a year with no progress.



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


Re: [Talk-us] US highway tagging (was Re: highway shields: get your kicks, where?)

2011-01-05 Thread Richard Weait
On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 4:09 PM, Alex Mauer ha...@hawkesnest.net wrote:

 Not sure if you’re looking for commentary on the shield overlay in general,
 but it seems like it has some problems.  Take a look at I-39/US-51 here[1].
  Only one shield for I-39 until you scroll all the way south to Bloomington,
 IL.

 I don’t know if that’s because it’s prioritizing US shields over interstate
 shields or what, but it should show both at equal frequency.  It also seems
 like there are way too many US-51 shields.

When more than one relation is shared on a way, the shield placement
is sensitive to relative way-length, and starting points.  Zoom in a
bit and you get alternating shields.

http://weait.com:8080/map/shield2.html?zoom=9lat=44.90346lon=-89.61928layers=0BTT

The correct way to do this will be to find co-incident relations, and
build a combined shield to place at each shield location, rather then
alternating positions.  This scales better for multiple co-incident
relations.  And it looks great.

 I assume it’s not expected to display state routes, at least not yet.

I've added state routes in several states.  Check your favorite places
in CA, CO, NH, NY, OH, MA, and a few others (so far).  I also added
some shields in Australia the other day.

 I’d give the shields a black outline rather than putting them on a solid
 black box.

I understand that others will make different rendering choices when
they build their styles.  ;-)

I have nothing against the die-cut style of US shield, but the ones
I see posted on the roads 'round here have the black rectangular
background.  I think CA still uses the die-cut shield.  Do others?

 Other than that it looks great.

Thank you!

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


Re: [Talk-us] US highway tagging (was Re: highway shields: get your kicks, where?)

2011-01-05 Thread Alex Mauer

On 01/05/2011 09:50 AM, Richard Weait wrote:

On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 4:09 PM, Alex Mauerha...@hawkesnest.net  wrote:


Not sure if you’re looking for commentary on the shield overlay in general,
but it seems like it has some problems.  Take a look at I-39/US-51 here[1].
  Only one shield for I-39 until you scroll all the way south to Bloomington,
IL.

I don’t know if that’s because it’s prioritizing US shields over interstate
shields or what, but it should show both at equal frequency.  It also seems
like there are way too many US-51 shields.


When more than one relation is shared on a way, the shield placement
is sensitive to relative way-length, and starting points.  Zoom in a
bit and you get alternating shields.


You have to zoom in quite a bit (z11) to start seeing I-39 regularly. 
It makes it quite a bit harder to follow the route.



The correct way to do this will be to find co-incident relations, and
build a combined shield to place at each shield location, rather then
alternating positions.  This scales better for multiple co-incident
relations.  And it looks great.


It seems to me that the correct way is to actually alternate 
positions…at zoom 9 you see one I-39 shield near Wausau, and then 
bunches of US-51 shields as you go south.


I’m sure that building a combined shield would also do the job though, 
as long as it doesn’t end up too wide.



I've added state routes in several states.  Check your favorite places
in CA, CO, NH, NY, OH, MA, and a few others (so far).  I also added
some shields in Australia the other day.


Ah, I only looked in WI.


I’d give the shields a black outline rather than putting them on a solid
black box.


I understand that others will make different rendering choices when
they build their styles.  ;-)

I have nothing against the die-cut style of US shield, but the ones
I see posted on the roads 'round here have the black rectangular
background.  I think CA still uses the die-cut shield.  Do others?


As NE2 said, the black background is common on standalone signs but the 
die-cut style is used on the green guide signs [1].  I find the black 
corners distracting, and it loses the distinctive shape of the US sign. 
 It also looks sort of like the artifacts you see when text has the 
wrong-color background or a colored background instead of a transparent one.


Maybe try just a black outline on the shaped shield, or even just 
beveling the corners of the black outline?


—Alex Mauer “hawke”

1. http://www.aaroads.com/delaware/delaware010/us-040_eb_at_de-001_sb.jpg


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


Re: [Talk-us] US highway tagging (was Re: highway shields: get your kicks, where?)

2011-01-05 Thread Alan Mintz

At 2011-01-05 07:50, Richard Weait wrote:

On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 4:09 PM, Alex Mauer ha...@hawkesnest.net wrote:

 I'd give the shields a black outline rather than putting them on a solid
 black box.

I have nothing against the die-cut style of US shield, but the ones
I see posted on the roads 'round here have the black rectangular
background.  I think CA still uses the die-cut shield.  Do others?


I don't believe I've seen anything other than the die-cut style in CA. Any 
background would look wrong.


--
Alan Mintz alan_mintz+...@earthlink.net


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


Re: [Talk-us] US highway tagging (was Re: highway shields: get your kicks, where?)

2011-01-05 Thread Nathan Edgars II
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 11:37 AM, Alan Mintz
alan_mintz+...@earthlink.net wrote:
 I don't believe I've seen anything other than the die-cut style in CA. Any
 background would look wrong.

You live in the one state that still uses cutout US Highway shields :)
See the image near the top of http://www.usends.com/ for what other states use.

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


Re: [Talk-us] US highway tagging (was Re: highway shields: get your kicks, where?)

2011-01-04 Thread Paul Johnson
On 01/03/2011 10:08 AM, Nathan Edgars II wrote:

 Also, is it now correct to not tag (network, ref) the individual ways that
 are part of a route relation? What about name? Is it correct to remove
 those existing tags from the ways (and ensure they are on the relation)? I'm
 not talking about a large-scale bot update, but as long as I'm editing them
 for some other reason anyway.
 
 No, it's not correct to remove refs from ways.

I really would like to hear wider input on this, still, as it really
doesn't make sense to waste the way's ref tag for refs that don't belong
to the way, but the route that uses the way...



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


Re: [Talk-us] US highway tagging (was Re: highway shields: get your kicks, where?)

2011-01-04 Thread Paul Johnson
On 01/03/2011 09:52 AM, Alan Mintz wrote:
 At 2011-01-02 19:46, Paul Johnson wrote:
 On 01/01/2011 11:55 AM, Richard Weait wrote:
  I've been adding more highway shields to the shield renderer.  Most
  recently I've added a shield for Historic Route 66.
 
 
 http://weait.com:8080/map/shield.html?lat=40.36679lon=-89.10653zoom=16layers=BTF

 
 Cool. Shouldn't the relation be tagged:
 
 network=US:US
 ref=66
 modifier=HISTORIC

Technically, probably shouldn't exist, since US-66 hasn't existed since
sometime in the late 1980s and it's using the recreational brown signs
today.  Given the number of times US-66's route has changed, I'm not
sure it even makes sense to use relations for this without qualifying
the era.

 according to
 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_States_roads_tagging ?
 
 Also, is it now correct to not tag (network, ref) the individual way
 that are part of a route relation? What about name? Is it correct to
 remove those existing tags from the ways (and ensure they are on the
 relation)? I'm not talking about a large-scale bot update, but as long
 as I'm editing them for some other reason anyway.
 
 
 Eh, OK-66 and Old US-66 and USBR-66 are all in my neighborhood.
 
 What is USBR-66?

US Bike Route.  I'm thinking Oklahoma jumped the gun on posting it as
such since as far as I can tell, only 1 and 76 exist so far in that
network (and Oklahoma's not even using the right signs for that).



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


Re: [Talk-us] US highway tagging (was Re: highway shields: get your kicks, where?)

2011-01-04 Thread Mike N.

No, it's not correct to remove refs from ways.


I really would like to hear wider input on this, still, as it really
doesn't make sense to waste the way's ref tag for refs that don't belong
to the way, but the route that uses the way...


 I agree - it's premature to redefine the usage of ref until a number of 
renderers are getting route information from other sources such as the 
relation.


[ Whatever happened to the discussion on highway tagging consensus?  Is 
it happening on the Wiki now?   I thought there was enough information to 
move toward a consensus but I couldn't follow it all on mailing list 
messages. ]





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


Re: [Talk-us] US highway tagging (was Re: highway shields: get your kicks, where?)

2011-01-04 Thread Richard Welty

On 1/4/11 3:18 AM, Paul Johnson wrote:

On 01/03/2011 10:08 AM, Nathan Edgars II wrote:


Also, is it now correct to not tag (network, ref) the individual ways that
are part of a route relation? What about name? Is it correct to remove
those existing tags from the ways (and ensure they are on the relation)? I'm
not talking about a large-scale bot update, but as long as I'm editing them
for some other reason anyway.

No, it's not correct to remove refs from ways.

I really would like to hear wider input on this, still, as it really
doesn't make sense to waste the way's ref tag for refs that don't belong
to the way, but the route that uses the way...


rendering engines haven't, by and large, shifted over to using ref tags
on the relations. while i think they should, i also don't think we ought to
cause the massive level of breakage that would ensue if they just got
removed.

richard


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


Re: [Talk-us] US highway tagging (was Re: highway shields: get your kicks, where?)

2011-01-04 Thread Alan Mintz

At 2011-01-04 00:16, Paul Johnson wrote:

On 01/03/2011 09:52 AM, Alan Mintz wrote:
 network=US:US
 ref=66
 modifier=HISTORIC

Technically, probably shouldn't exist, since US-66 hasn't existed since
sometime in the late 1980s and it's using the recreational brown signs
today.  Given the number of times US-66's route has changed, I'm not
sure it even makes sense to use relations for this without qualifying
the era.


There seems to have been some sort of co-ordinated effort because we have 
those signs in CA, too. Along much of the route along the San Gabriel 
mountains foothills (Huntington, Alosta, Foothill Blvds), there are these 
signs: 
https://sites.google.com/site/am909geo/osm-1/DSCQ2464.CA_US66_Historic.small.jpg?attredirects=0 
. The eastern portion of this (from ~San Dimas to San Bernardino) is 
currently CA-66, and may be occasionally signed that way (though I can't 
seem to put my finger on one at the moment).


In Monrovia, they've signed it with the old-style US-66 with a CA on it: 
https://sites.google.com/site/am909geo/osm-1/DSCQ2440.CA_US66.small.jpg?attredirects=0 
, even though it is not part of CA-66 and US-66 no longer exists.


Glendora actually changed the name of Foothill Blvd to Route 66 and 
signed it this way: 
https://sites.google.com/site/am909geo/osm-1/DSCQ2662.Route_66_Street.small.jpg?attredirects=0


--
Alan Mintz alan_mintz+...@earthlink.net


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


Re: [Talk-us] US highway tagging (was Re: highway shields: get your kicks, where?)

2011-01-04 Thread Phil! Gold
* Mike N. nice...@att.net [2011-01-04 06:58 -0500]:
 No, it's not correct to remove refs from ways.
 
 I really would like to hear wider input on this
 
  I agree - it's premature to redefine the usage of ref until a
 number of renderers are getting route information from other sources
 such as the relation.

I also agree with NE2.  The current OSM standard is to look at way refs to
get the routes they belong to.

 [ Whatever happened to the discussion on highway tagging
 consensus?  Is it happening on the Wiki now?   I thought there was
 enough information to move toward a consensus but I couldn't follow
 it all on mailing list messages. ]

There was rough consensus that the current approach is more or less right,
but disagreement on several specifics.  Richard Weait suggested that
further discussion probably wouldn't accomplish much without a sample
implementation, so I've (in my copious free time, sigh) been working on
some improvements to the rendering chain, including some modifications to
osm2pgsql.  I'm not sure when I'll have something reasonably complete, but
once I do, I plan to start the discussion again with my code as a
reference point.

-- 
...computer contrarian of the first order... / http://aperiodic.net/phil/
PGP: 026A27F2  print: D200 5BDB FC4B B24A 9248  9F7A 4322 2D22 026A 27F2
--- --
Today's subliminal thought is:
 --- --

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


Re: [Talk-us] US highway tagging (was Re: highway shields: get your kicks, where?)

2011-01-04 Thread Ian Dees
On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 9:29 AM, Phil! Gold phi...@pobox.com wrote:

 There was rough consensus that the current approach is more or less right,
 but disagreement on several specifics.  Richard Weait suggested that
 further discussion probably wouldn't accomplish much without a sample
 implementation, so I've (in my copious free time, sigh) been working on
 some improvements to the rendering chain, including some modifications to
 osm2pgsql.  I'm not sure when I'll have something reasonably complete, but
 once I do, I plan to start the discussion again with my code as a
 reference point.


What changes to osm2pgsql are you making? As far as I remember it already
creates 1 long linestring for contiguous elements of a route relation and
puts the relation's ref tags on that linestring. We only need to modify the
mapnik style sheets to get them to use SVG shields (so we can put the value
of the ref in the empty slot of the SVG shield).

Also, rweait has an example implementation floating around somewhere. I'm
not sure how much work he had to do to get it to work, but it came up pretty
quick after the discussion started.
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us


Re: [Talk-us] US highway tagging (was Re: highway shields: get your kicks, where?)

2011-01-04 Thread Phil! Gold
* Ian Dees ian.d...@gmail.com [2011-01-04 09:36 -0600]:
 What changes to osm2pgsql are you making?

In my opinion, any approach has to be backwards compatible with having ref
tags on ways, if only because it's worked so well in Europe.  Thus, I want
to be able to tell whether a given way is a member of a route relation
(and render its ref tag the old way if it isn't), so I'm adding a table
to do joins between relations and their members.

 Also, rweait has an example implementation floating around somewhere. I'm
 not sure how much work he had to do to get it to work, but it came up pretty
 quick after the discussion started.

If I recall correctly, Richard's rendering completely abandons the old
rendering style, which I don't want to do.

-- 
...computer contrarian of the first order... / http://aperiodic.net/phil/
PGP: 026A27F2  print: D200 5BDB FC4B B24A 9248  9F7A 4322 2D22 026A 27F2
--- --
The class was learning about some revolt in which some peasants had wanted
to stop being peasants and, since the nobles had won, had stopped being
peasants *really quickly*.
   -- _Soul Music_, Terry Pratchett
 --- --

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


Re: [Talk-us] US highway tagging (was Re: highway shields: get your kicks, where?)

2011-01-04 Thread Richard Weait
On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 11:04 AM, Phil! Gold phi...@pobox.com wrote:

 If I recall correctly, Richard's rendering completely abandons the old
 rendering style, which I don't want to do.

Then let me make this point absolutely clear.  Don't look at the
background layer.  It doesn't matter at all.  Look at the shield
overlay.  The shield overlay could be added to any rendering layer.

Here you go.  The shield layer on top of OSM's default mapnik rendering.

http://weait.com:8080/map/shield2.html?zoom=10lat=43.04117lon=-78.92749layers=0BTT

Now you can switch backgrounds and switch the shield layer on and off
to see what's included in the shield layer.

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


Re: [Talk-us] US highway tagging (was Re: highway shields: get your kicks, where?)

2011-01-04 Thread Phil! Gold
* Richard Weait rich...@weait.com [2011-01-04 11:49 -0500]:
 On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 11:04 AM, Phil! Gold phi...@pobox.com wrote:
  If I recall correctly, Richard's rendering completely abandons the old
  rendering style, which I don't want to do.
 
 Then let me make this point absolutely clear.  Don't look at the
 background layer.  It doesn't matter at all.  Look at the shield
 overlay.  The shield overlay could be added to any rendering layer.

What I want, however, is to mix the two styles, but in a different way
than overlaying them.  I want to suppress the old shields if and only if
there's a route relation.  That's not a disparagement of your rendering;
it's the answer to Ian's question about my changes to osm2pgsql.

-- 
...computer contrarian of the first order... / http://aperiodic.net/phil/
PGP: 026A27F2  print: D200 5BDB FC4B B24A 9248  9F7A 4322 2D22 026A 27F2
--- --
P.S. Perl's master plan (or what passes for one) is to take over the
world like English did.  Er, *as* English did...
   -- Larry Wall
 --- --

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


Re: [Talk-us] US highway tagging (was Re: highway shields: get your kicks, where?)

2011-01-04 Thread Alex Mauer

On 01/04/2011 10:49 AM, Richard Weait wrote:

Then let me make this point absolutely clear.  Don't look at the
background layer.  It doesn't matter at all.  Look at the shield
overlay.  The shield overlay could be added to any rendering layer.


Not sure if you’re looking for commentary on the shield overlay in 
general, but it seems like it has some problems.  Take a look at 
I-39/US-51 here[1].  Only one shield for I-39 until you scroll all the 
way south to Bloomington, IL.


I don’t know if that’s because it’s prioritizing US shields over 
interstate shields or what, but it should show both at equal frequency. 
 It also seems like there are way too many US-51 shields.


I assume it’s not expected to display state routes, at least not yet.

I’d give the shields a black outline rather than putting them on a solid 
black box.


Other than that it looks great.

—Alex Mauer “hawke”

1. 
http://weait.com:8080/map/shield2.html?zoom=9lat=44.90346lon=-89.61928layers=0BTT



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


[Talk-us] US highway tagging (was Re: highway shields: get your kicks, where?)

2011-01-03 Thread Alan Mintz

At 2011-01-02 19:46, Paul Johnson wrote:

On 01/01/2011 11:55 AM, Richard Weait wrote:
 I've been adding more highway shields to the shield renderer.  Most
 recently I've added a shield for Historic Route 66.

 
http://weait.com:8080/map/shield.html?lat=40.36679lon=-89.10653zoom=16layers=BTF


Cool. Shouldn't the relation be tagged:

network=US:US
ref=66
modifier=HISTORIC

according to http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_States_roads_tagging ?

Also, is it now correct to not tag (network, ref) the individual ways 
that are part of a route relation? What about name? Is it correct to 
remove those existing tags from the ways (and ensure they are on the 
relation)? I'm not talking about a large-scale bot update, but as long as 
I'm editing them for some other reason anyway.




Eh, OK-66 and Old US-66 and USBR-66 are all in my neighborhood.


What is USBR-66?

--
Alan Mintz alan_mintz+...@earthlink.net


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


Re: [Talk-us] US highway tagging (was Re: highway shields: get your kicks, where?)

2011-01-03 Thread Nathan Edgars II
On Mon, Jan 3, 2011 at 10:52 AM, Alan Mintz
alan_mintz+...@earthlink.net wrote:
 At 2011-01-02 19:46, Paul Johnson wrote:

 On 01/01/2011 11:55 AM, Richard Weait wrote:
  I've been adding more highway shields to the shield renderer.  Most
  recently I've added a shield for Historic Route 66.
 
 
  http://weait.com:8080/map/shield.html?lat=40.36679lon=-89.10653zoom=16layers=BTF

 Cool. Shouldn't the relation be tagged:

 network=US:US
 ref=66
 modifier=HISTORIC

 according to http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_States_roads_tagging
 ?

Using the modifier tag for a banner seems wrong, as the route
designation is e.g. 30 Business, not 30. It's a little more iffy for a
historic route.

 Also, is it now correct to not tag (network, ref) the individual ways that
 are part of a route relation? What about name? Is it correct to remove
 those existing tags from the ways (and ensure they are on the relation)? I'm
 not talking about a large-scale bot update, but as long as I'm editing them
 for some other reason anyway.

No, it's not correct to remove refs from ways.

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