Re: [Tagging] RFC: highway=tidal_road
2011/11/22 Colin Smale colin.sm...@xs4all.nl: On 22/11/2011 21:33, Frederik Ramm wrote: When you say No, don't you mean Yes? Not sure if you are responding to the original post, or to my reaction. All it says on the proposal page is A road that gets tidally flooded . Where do you get your assumptions from about it being an unsurfaced path? You are right that this proposal is not necessarily about an unsurfaced way, it could well be covered with asphalt. A path like we see it in OSM is a way that is not suitable for cars (too small), while this is about roads (width should permit a car to take it). The scenario I had in mind was the Lindisfarne Causeway in northern England.This is never closed, but is flooded at high tide. Many people are rescued every year because they don't heed the warnings. Doesn't that fit your description? Check this: http://g.co/maps/f74xb Yes, this would fit the proposed tag. As you can see from your picture not beeing aware about the tide situation can cost your life. IMHO this kind of road merits its own main highway tag, it would be too dangerous to rely on subtags, and it's overall characteristics are too different from a normal road (a road which doesn't get regularily flooded). cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] RFC: highway=tidal_road
On Wed, 23 Nov 2011, Nathan Edgars II wrote: On 11/23/2011 5:40 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: Yes, this would fit the proposed tag. As you can see from your picture not beeing aware about the tide situation can cost your life. IMHO this kind of road merits its own main highway tag, it would be too dangerous to rely on subtags, and it's overall characteristics are too different from a normal road (a road which doesn't get regularily flooded). This is similar to a low water crossing: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Low_water_crossing I don't think we use any special highway=* tags for those, or for other roads that may be dangerous at times (e.g. heavy snow, military proving grounds). If someone ignores signs and physical conditions, it's not our fault, and we shouldn't tag incorrectly to get routing software to ignore these roads. Agreed. Otherwise we'll end up never-ending arguments about how frequently the road has to be dangerous to warrant such special tags and what danger is dangerous enough. ...Instead I wish that hazard=* (or like) tag and namespace would be developed and standardized to collect this kind of information. -- i. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] looking for native speaker opinion: tidal / tidalflat / tidal flat
Beeing the two proponents of tidalflat_path and tidal_road not native English speakers we decided to ask here in the international list which term is best suited (please only reply if you are a native speaker). the alternatives are: A: tidal (tidal_path, tidal_road) B: tidalflat (tidalflat_path, tidalflat_road) C: tidal flat (tidal_flat_path, tidal_flat_road) thank you, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] RFC: highway=tidal_road
2011/11/23 Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com: On 11/23/2011 5:40 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: Yes, this would fit the proposed tag. As you can see from your picture not beeing aware about the tide situation can cost your life. IMHO this kind of road merits its own main highway tag, it would be too dangerous to rely on subtags, and it's overall characteristics are too different from a normal road (a road which doesn't get regularily flooded). This is similar to a low water crossing: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Low_water_crossing no, it is IMHO not similar to low water crossing, being the latter usually short while a tidal road will be often some kilometres long, so the danger is really not comparable. I don't think we use any special highway=* tags for those, or for other roads that may be dangerous at times (e.g. heavy snow, military proving grounds). If someone ignores signs and physical conditions, it's not our fault, and we shouldn't tag incorrectly to get routing software to ignore these roads. IMHO a road which is frequently flooded has this as a characteristic (you can also see this because they got their own name in language) while a road where you might expect heavy snowfall in winter is not comparable, it still is a road (the snowfall IMHO is not a characteristic of the road, while beeing flooded every day for some hours IMHO is). cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] RFC: highway=tidal_road
Hi, On 11/22/11 21:48, Colin Smale wrote: Surely the road in this case simply has tide-related opening times (and a variable surface?). It may be secondary, tertiary, unclassified or whatever. The fact that it is sometimes closed by the tide should be tagged separately from the type of road. No. When you say No, don't you mean Yes? I meant: No, the fact that it is sometimes closed by the tide should not be tagged separately from the type of road, because I am not talking about something that is 'basically a normal road just with an extra property'; I am talking about something that is not a normal road. Where do you get your assumptions from about it being an unsurfaced path? I see - I had this in mind: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Tidalflat_path which refers to a certain type of path we have in Germany in the North Sea, where you basically walk on the (more or less) dry seabed. The scenario I had in mind was the Lindisfarne Causeway in northern England.This is never closed, but is flooded at high tide. Many people are rescued every year because they don't heed the warnings. Doesn't that fit your description? Somewhat; I mis-interpreted your closed as if there was a gate or door somehow, when you probably just meant closed by being flooded. In a way, the Lindisfarne Causeway looks like a normal road with just a few extra signs. OTOH the paths mentioned in the tidalflat_path proposal probably don't have that many signs... Bye Frederik ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] RFC: highway=tidal_road
2011/11/23 Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org: I meant: No, the fact that it is sometimes closed by the tide should not be tagged separately from the type of road, because I am not talking about something that is 'basically a normal road just with an extra property'; I am talking about something that is not a normal road. +1 In a way, the Lindisfarne Causeway looks like a normal road with just a few extra signs. OTOH the paths mentioned in the tidalflat_path proposal probably don't have that many signs... -1, it really depends when you take your picture if it looks like a normal road or not: http://www.journallive.co.uk/north-east-news/todays-news/2011/06/18/tourists-ignore-lindisfarne-causeway-tide-times-61634-28898474/ cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] looking for native speaker opinion: tidal / tidalflat / tidal flat
2011/11/23 Richard Mann richard.mann.westoxf...@googlemail.com: A) On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 11:23 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: the alternatives are: A: tidal (tidal_path, tidal_road) B: tidalflat (tidalflat_path, tidalflat_road) C: tidal flat (tidal_flat_path, tidal_flat_road) Thank you Richard. Waiting for Lulus reply and we'll change tidalflat_path. cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] looking for native speaker opinion: tidal / tidalflat / tidal flat
Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: Beeing the two proponents of tidalflat_path and tidal_road not native English speakers we decided to ask here in the international list which term is best suited Yes, A. By and large (and, of course, there are exceptions), English does not run two words together to form one word in the same way that German does. Something like tidalflat is unlikely to be English. (The Americans have a nasty habit of making portmanteau words like staycation from stay and vacation, but arguably they don't speak English either. ;) ) cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/looking-for-native-speaker-opinion-tidal-tidalflat-tidal-flat-tp7024016p7024406.html Sent from the Tagging mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] RFC: highway=tidal_road
Stephen Hope slh...@gmail.com wrote: On 23 November 2011 16:00, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote: Don't know, but it is certainly not tidal_road, as that proposal says a road that gets tidally flooded. You are not describing a road. What would you classify it as if the same way happened to be inland, with no tides involved? Figure that out, then we'll be getting somewhere Stephen What would the correct highway classification be for an Oregon beach? These fall under the Oregon Department of Transportation's jurisdiction despite not being improved for vehicular use (and trying will seriously screw up a bicycle, based on experience). It sounds like the beach might be classed as a track, in that case. I assume that the dunes, if any, would be classified differently than the water's edge. From my (admittedly limited) knowledge of reegulations elsewhere, driving, or even walking, on dunes is usually forbidden because damaging any vegetation will allow the dune to shift position. -- John F. Eldredge -- j...@jfeldredge.com Reserve your right to think, for even to think wrongly is better than not to think at all. -- Hypatia of Alexandria ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] RFC: highway=tidal_road
2011/11/23 John F. Eldredge j...@jfeldredge.com: Stephen Hope slh...@gmail.com wrote: What would the correct highway classification be for an Oregon beach? These fall under the Oregon Department of Transportation's jurisdiction despite not being improved for vehicular use (and trying will seriously screw up a bicycle, based on experience). It sounds like the beach might be classed as a track, in that case. -1, we should not classify every area where vehicles might access as a way. You can (physically) drive on most meadows and crops, but that doesn't make them a track. He explicitly stated: despite not being improved for vehicular use cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] looking for native speaker opinion: tidal / tidalflat / tidal flat
Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: Beeing the two proponents of tidalflat_path and tidal_road not native English speakers we decided to ask here in the international list which term is best suited (please only reply if you are a native speaker). the alternatives are: A: tidal (tidal_path, tidal_road) B: tidalflat (tidalflat_path, tidalflat_road) C: tidal flat (tidal_flat_path, tidal_flat_road) thank you, Martin My recommendation, as a native English speaker, would be to use tidal rather than tidal flat. Tidal flat is apparently a synoym for mud flat, but such roads might also be placed across sandy or rocky terrain. For that matter, such terrain might not be completely flat; there might be some areas that are only submerged when there is an extra-high tide, or if there is a storm. -- John F. Eldredge -- j...@jfeldredge.com Reserve your right to think, for even to think wrongly is better than not to think at all. -- Hypatia of Alexandria ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
