Re: [Potlatch-dev] What do the new cycleway values mean?
On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 11:32 PM, Andy Allan gravityst...@gmail.com wrote: Aargh, what a lot of confusion. The cycleway=shared|segregated is an option for standalone ways (either highway=cycleway or highway=path) to indicate whether the bikes and pedestrians share the same tarmac. In the UK there are two white-on-blue street signs - one with a man and a bike beside one another with a white line between them (i.e. segregated) and one with the man above the bike and no dividing line (i.e. shared). There is a third sign (cycling only) but that can be expressed by bicycle=yes foot=no etc. I've implemented this here: http://trac.openstreetmap.org/changeset/25365 I think it's a pretty good tagging scheme actually. The only thing it doesn't really cover is priorities (eg, paths where pedestrians have right of way), and situations with more than just bikes and pedestrians (notably, horses). Steve ___ Potlatch-dev mailing list Potlatch-dev@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/potlatch-dev
Re: [Potlatch-dev] What do the new cycleway values mean?
Richard Mann wrote: They almost certainly mean shared with peds and white-paint segregated from peds (as opposed to track which the Germans think is completely segregated). Yep. I'm sure there's room for more help text and little pop-ups beside particular settings (and, eventually, for country-specific presets, but that's a fair way down the road/cycleway). I think there should probably be policy, something like the value must represent ?5% of current uses. Potlatch is a conscious (collective) act of authorship, not really a democracy. You can't design coherent beginner-friendly software, or documentation, democratically - as the wiki sadly proves. One of the JOSM developers the other day described Potlatch development as more autocratic than JOSM and that's fair comment. We try to preserve the original OSM ethos of hardcore do-ocracy. :) cheers Richard ___ Potlatch-dev mailing list Potlatch-dev@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/potlatch-dev
Re: [Potlatch-dev] What do the new cycleway values mean?
On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 9:58 AM, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net wrote: Potlatch is a conscious (collective) act of authorship, not really a democracy. You can't design coherent beginner-friendly software, or documentation, democratically - as the wiki sadly proves. I think it's worth being cautious on adding things purely based on their %age occurrences too - without checking how many people vs 1 automated import have created them, whether they are rendered or something else is, even whether they make sense. Editorial judgement is required here. Cheers, Andy Who would like to see some judgement used in picking icons for the dnd panel, mutter mutter! ___ Potlatch-dev mailing list Potlatch-dev@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/potlatch-dev
Re: [Potlatch-dev] What do the new cycleway values mean?
On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 9:31 PM, Dave Stubbs osm.l...@randomjunk.co.uk wrote: Segregated cycle path: A path where cyclists and pedestrians are separated by a painted line or kerb. Sounds an awful lot like cycleway=track to me. Shared cycle path: A path where cyclists and pedestrians share the full width of the path. That's what we, in Australia, call a bike path and tag highway=cycleway, foot=designated, bicycle=designated. Added by Shaun in December to get more accurate cycle path information for routing purposes (e.g. CycleStreets) That's all well and good for CycleStreets, but I'm iffy about having it in an international edition of Potlatch. It makes choosing the right cycleway tag absurdly difficult. Another issue here...why is a path where cyclists and pedestrians share the full width of the path an option on a *road*? Is it implying that in addition to the road, there is a parallel shared bike path? Eck...very unintuitive. Steve ___ Potlatch-dev mailing list Potlatch-dev@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/potlatch-dev
Re: [Potlatch-dev] What do the new cycleway values mean?
On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 10:35 PM, Andy Allan gravityst...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 9:58 AM, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net wrote: I think it's worth being cautious on adding things purely based on their %age occurrences too - without checking how many people vs 1 automated import have created them, whether they are rendered or something else is, even whether they make sense. Editorial judgement is required here. Yeah, I've looked to taginfo in the absence of other information about the tags. I'd quite like Potlatch to play a role in promoting good tag usage. If a proposed tag has strong community support, presumably we would want it implemented in Potlatch before waiting for numbers in taginfo. Steve ___ Potlatch-dev mailing list Potlatch-dev@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/potlatch-dev
Re: [Potlatch-dev] What do the new cycleway values mean?
On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 10:35 PM, Andy Allan gravityst...@gmail.com wrote: Who would like to see some judgement used in picking icons for the dnd panel, mutter mutter! Do tell? I'm probably guilty of whatever the crime is. Do you mean that the icons just look bad together (all different colours) or that they're badly drawn...or what? Also, are we perhaps reaching the point where not all node features should be dnd's? For example, I don't think dnd highway=turning_circle is particularly useful... Steve ___ Potlatch-dev mailing list Potlatch-dev@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/potlatch-dev
Re: [Potlatch-dev] What do the new cycleway values mean?
On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 11:59 AM, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 9:31 PM, Dave Stubbs osm.l...@randomjunk.co.uk wrote: Segregated cycle path: A path where cyclists and pedestrians are separated by a painted line or kerb. Sounds an awful lot like cycleway=track to me. Shared cycle path: A path where cyclists and pedestrians share the full width of the path. That's what we, in Australia, call a bike path and tag highway=cycleway, foot=designated, bicycle=designated. Aargh, what a lot of confusion. The cycleway=shared|segregated is an option for standalone ways (either highway=cycleway or highway=path) to indicate whether the bikes and pedestrians share the same tarmac. In the UK there are two white-on-blue street signs - one with a man and a bike beside one another with a white line between them (i.e. segregated) and one with the man above the bike and no dividing line (i.e. shared). There is a third sign (cycling only) but that can be expressed by bicycle=yes foot=no etc. See http://www.devon.gov.uk/index/transport/traffic/traffic_management/cycle_lane_road_markings.htm for examples. I have no idea how common / consistent these signs are around the world. They can't really be used on road-type highways, since they clash with the lane/track designation. Added by Shaun in December to get more accurate cycle path information for routing purposes (e.g. CycleStreets) That's all well and good for CycleStreets, but I'm iffy about having it in an international edition of Potlatch. It makes choosing the right cycleway tag absurdly difficult. Users shouldn't need to worry about this. If they can pick various options then the tags can be sorted out behind the scenes. Another issue here...why is a path where cyclists and pedestrians share the full width of the path an option on a *road*? Is it implying that in addition to the road, there is a parallel shared bike path? Eck...very unintuitive. That sounds like it's in error, I can have a look at map features to see what's going on. Cheers, Andy ___ Potlatch-dev mailing list Potlatch-dev@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/potlatch-dev
Re: [Potlatch-dev] What do the new cycleway values mean?
On 03/02/11 12:27, Steve Bennett wrote: Do tell? I'm probably guilty of whatever the crime is. Do you mean that the icons just look bad together (all different colours) or that they're badly drawn...or what? Well the Florist icon stands out like a sore thumb to start with - not only is it a different colour to almost all the other shopping icons but it is also a completely different shape. Other issues would be that Pharmacy is a different colour to other icons in the shopping section and there is no colour consistency at all in the amenity section. The weir icon in the water section is once again different to everything else in it's general style. The places section has five (yes, five) completely identical icons. I can also see about five which are just displaying a question mark so presumably the icon is missing. You honestly don't really need to be a graphic design genius to see what most of the problems are... Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ ___ Potlatch-dev mailing list Potlatch-dev@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/potlatch-dev
Re: [Potlatch-dev] What do the new cycleway values mean?
On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 12:35 PM, Tom Hughes t...@compton.nu wrote: On 03/02/11 12:27, Steve Bennett wrote: Do tell? I'm probably guilty of whatever the crime is. Do you mean that the icons just look bad together (all different colours) or that they're badly drawn...or what? Well the Florist icon stands out like a sore thumb to start with - not only is it a different colour to almost all the other shopping icons but it is also a completely different shape. Other issues would be that Pharmacy is a different colour to other icons in the shopping section and there is no colour consistency at all in the amenity section. The weir icon in the water section is once again different to everything else in it's general style. The places section has five (yes, five) completely identical icons. I can also see about five which are just displaying a question mark so presumably the icon is missing. You honestly don't really need to be a graphic design genius to see what most of the problems are... The missing icons are the ones that annoy me most - I carefully made sure they all had icons at some point previously, and we've been backsliding since then. Cheers, Andy ___ Potlatch-dev mailing list Potlatch-dev@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/potlatch-dev
Re: [Potlatch-dev] What do the new cycleway values mean?
On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 12:27 PM, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote: Also, are we perhaps reaching the point where not all node features should be dnd's? For example, I don't think dnd highway=turning_circle is particularly useful... Absolutely - there are also things that I'd like potlatch2 to recognise when selected (e.g. country nodes) without encouraging anyone to add more. We also have the issue that some of our point tags are inappropriate for pois - e.g. turning_circle should be an option for selectedwaynode but possibly not for selectedpoinode - but the whole distinction between nodes and ways on one hand and pois, points, lines and areas on the other is a little bit confused in p2 at the moment. Cheers, Andy ___ Potlatch-dev mailing list Potlatch-dev@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/potlatch-dev
Re: [Potlatch-dev] What do the new cycleway values mean?
Well the Florist icon stands out like a sore thumb to start with - not only is it a different colour to almost all the other shopping icons but it is also a completely different shape. The florist icons certainly needs to be removed or attribution needs to be added since it is sourced from here: http://code.google.com/p/google-maps-icons/wiki/License -- Brian ___ Potlatch-dev mailing list Potlatch-dev@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/potlatch-dev
