Re: [Tagging] Tagging national/international routes.

[Yves]

Could be other relations named "Partridge Track Loop 1" etc.
If a user search for Partridge Track, they'll be able to find them. What do 
they share with the main route? The name, the operator? The signs? There's 
maybe no need to group them in another relation.
Yves 

Le 8 mai 2018 02:53:43 GMT+02:00, Kevin Kenny  a 
écrit :
>On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 7:22 PM, Peter Elderson 
>wrote:
>
>> I map everything as long as it’s waymarked. If a variant is waymarked
>and
>> named, it belongs to the route. It is the hierarchy I am not sure how
>to
>> tag exactly. I see type=route in th Netherlands and type=superroute
>in
>> Germany for the same type of hierarchy, and both seem to display fine
>on
>> waymarkedtrails. What is a type=superroute needed for then?
>>
>
> It appears to be for cases like
>https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/919642 - where I suspect that I
>got
>the tagging Not Entirely Right.
>
>I broke the route into segments at county boundaries because the whole
>thing had far too many ways to be manageable. In particular, it was
>crashing JOSM at the time, and I switched to Meerkartor briefly to
>break it
>up. JOSM has since been fixed. It appears that the Wiki
>https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:superroute suggests
>'superroute' for this type of object. I've not tagged the above
>relation
>thus, because JOSM complains that 'superroute' is an unknown relation
>type,
>and Waymarked Trails is happy with a 'type=route' superrelation
>containing
>subrelations for the sections.
>
>'type=superroute' is not obviously applicable to alternatives,
>bypasses,
>spurs, and whatnot - it appears that the route analyzer and Waymarked
>Trails still want the route to be continuous. The couple that I've
>encountered, I've tagged as separate routes. I have no idea what to do
>with
>https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/4836600 where the whole thing is
>waymarked as 'Partridge Path' with occasional signage identifying 'Loop
>1',
>'Loop 2', and 'Loop 3'. I, too, am interested in hearing suggestions
>about
>how to deal with this sort of beast.

Yves___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Is it possible to have highway=unclassified with ref tag?

[Tod Fitch]

Reminds me of an earlier career where I sometime had to deal with sensitive 
documents. All documents had to classified: “Top Secret”, “Secret”, 
“Confidential”, etc. But if a document did not require clearance to access it 
was classified as “unclassified”. Basically anything that was not classified as 
something else was classified as unclassified. Bureaucrats are wonderful at 
coming up with that type of thing.

I view the OSM/UK highway classification scheme the same way: “Unclassified” is 
a bucket to put things into that don’t meet the criteria for the other 
classifications. Perhaps it would have been better if they had used the word 
“other” but they didn’t. So just look up the code word “unclassified” in your 
OSM to American English code book and read out “other”. Not a motorway, trunk, 
primary, secondary, residential, service, track, etc.? Then it must be 
classified as “unclassified” (i.e. “other”).


> On May 7, 2018, at 5:19 PM, Greg Troxel  wrote:
> 
> Dave Swarthout  writes:
> 
>> But when a highway has an officially assigned ref doesn't that define it as
>> "classified"? I don't have a large stake in this discussion but it would
> 
> You would think.  But no.
> 
> In the UK, there is a notion of A/B/C roads, and then unclassified.  I
> gather this means they are part of the network but not declared one of
> A/B/C.
> 
> I was in Scotland (in the highlands just off Skye) in 2016, and saw a
> road that was U, and signed as U (a real number, but I don't
> remember it).  It was even more minor than the nearby C road.
> 
>> seem to me that any road so ranked by the authorities should not be tagged
>> as unclassified.
> 
> If you think of it as A/B/C/D where A is the most important
> (non-Interstate) roads and D the least, where D roads are just barely
> worthy of being numbered, but that we call D as U instead because that's
> what they do in the UK, I think you are not that far off.
> 
> Around me, unclassified is typically used for roads that are somewhat
> more important than others, but not to the level of being numbered.
> 


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Tagging national/international routes.

[Kevin Kenny]

On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 7:22 PM, Peter Elderson  wrote:

> I map everything as long as it’s waymarked. If a variant is waymarked and
> named, it belongs to the route. It is the hierarchy I am not sure how to
> tag exactly. I see type=route in th Netherlands and type=superroute in
> Germany for the same type of hierarchy, and both seem to display fine on
> waymarkedtrails. What is a type=superroute needed for then?
>

 It appears to be for cases like
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/919642 - where I suspect that I got
the tagging Not Entirely Right.

I broke the route into segments at county boundaries because the whole
thing had far too many ways to be manageable. In particular, it was
crashing JOSM at the time, and I switched to Meerkartor briefly to break it
up. JOSM has since been fixed. It appears that the Wiki
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:superroute suggests
'superroute' for this type of object. I've not tagged the above relation
thus, because JOSM complains that 'superroute' is an unknown relation type,
and Waymarked Trails is happy with a 'type=route' superrelation containing
subrelations for the sections.

'type=superroute' is not obviously applicable to alternatives, bypasses,
spurs, and whatnot - it appears that the route analyzer and Waymarked
Trails still want the route to be continuous. The couple that I've
encountered, I've tagged as separate routes. I have no idea what to do with
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/4836600 where the whole thing is
waymarked as 'Partridge Path' with occasional signage identifying 'Loop 1',
'Loop 2', and 'Loop 3'. I, too, am interested in hearing suggestions about
how to deal with this sort of beast.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Is it possible to have highway=unclassified with ref tag?

[Paul Johnson]

On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 7:19 PM, Greg Troxel  wrote:

> Dave Swarthout  writes:
>
> > But when a highway has an officially assigned ref doesn't that define it
> as
> > "classified"? I don't have a large stake in this discussion but it would
>
> You would think.  But no.
>
> In the UK, there is a notion of A/B/C roads, and then unclassified.  I
> gather this means they are part of the network but not declared one of
> A/B/C.
>
> I was in Scotland (in the highlands just off Skye) in 2016, and saw a
> road that was U, and signed as U (a real number, but I don't
> remember it).  It was even more minor than the nearby C road.
>
> > seem to me that any road so ranked by the authorities should not be
> tagged
> > as unclassified.
>
> If you think of it as A/B/C/D where A is the most important
> (non-Interstate) roads and D the least, where D roads are just barely
> worthy of being numbered, but that we call D as U instead because that's
> what they do in the UK, I think you are not that far off.
>
> Around me, unclassified is typically used for roads that are somewhat
> more important than others, but not to the level of being numbered.


And it's not hard to adapt to other places, for the most part.  It's about
the only sensible way to deal with Texas with it's multitudes of primary
state highways (secondary in OSM parlance) and secondary state highways
(generally tertiary in OSM parlance, since they're (mostly) all equal in
importance).  Otherwise you'd have to work out a ranking system on this
that goes into quaternary, quinery, sextary, septery...
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Is it possible to have highway=unclassified with ref tag?

[Greg Troxel]

Dave Swarthout  writes:

> But when a highway has an officially assigned ref doesn't that define it as
> "classified"? I don't have a large stake in this discussion but it would

You would think.  But no.

In the UK, there is a notion of A/B/C roads, and then unclassified.  I
gather this means they are part of the network but not declared one of
A/B/C.

I was in Scotland (in the highlands just off Skye) in 2016, and saw a
road that was U, and signed as U (a real number, but I don't
remember it).  It was even more minor than the nearby C road.

> seem to me that any road so ranked by the authorities should not be tagged
> as unclassified.

If you think of it as A/B/C/D where A is the most important
(non-Interstate) roads and D the least, where D roads are just barely
worthy of being numbered, but that we call D as U instead because that's
what they do in the UK, I think you are not that far off.

Around me, unclassified is typically used for roads that are somewhat
more important than others, but not to the level of being numbered.

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Tagging national/international routes.

[Peter Elderson]

I map everything as long as it’s waymarked. If a variant is waymarked and 
named, it belongs to the route. It is the hierarchy I am not sure how to tag 
exactly. I see type=route in th Netherlands and type=superroute in Germany for 
the same type of hierarchy, and both seem to display fine on waymarkedtrails. 
What is a type=superroute needed for then?

Mvg Peter Elderson

> Op 7 mei 2018 om 23:48 heeft Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> het volgende 
> geschreven:
> 
> Even local hiking routes can have variations in starting and stopping places 
> as well as route variations to accommodate things. 
> 
> I take the view that the 'normal' route is what I map. The different 
> start/stopping options lie along the route and can be accessed by those using 
> the route. Just like a bus route or a train route. 
> 
> The route variations I'm not certain of.
> 
> In any case .. I try to help the end users .. such as waymarkedtrails .. most 
> usefull to have the route correctly displayed there. 
> 
>> On 08/05/18 04:20, Peter Elderson wrote:
>> I've been searching the wiki's for a good description of how to tag long 
>> hiking routes, particularly compound international routes with separate 
>> sections per country, where the national section is also a national path on 
>> its own which in turn consists of several (sometimes many) sections.
>> 
>> Directionality  is not a problem with hiking routes, but alternative routes 
>> and different starting routes are very common and have to be accommodated. 
>> 
>> I can found some thoughts about it under "relations", but not a clear and 
>> definite scheme how to do this. Is there a consensus and if so where can I 
>> find the thematical documentation? 
>> 
>> -- 
>> Vr gr Peter Elderson
>> 
> 
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Tagging national/international routes.

[Warin]

Even local hiking routes can have variations in starting and stopping 
places as well as route variations to accommodate things.


I take the view that the 'normal' route is what I map. The different 
start/stopping options lie along the route and can be accessed by those 
using the route. Just like a bus route or a train route.


The route variations I'm not certain of.

In any case .. I try to help the end users .. such as waymarkedtrails .. 
most usefull to have the route correctly displayed there.


On 08/05/18 04:20, Peter Elderson wrote:
I've been searching the wiki's for a good description of how to tag 
long hiking routes, particularly compound international routes with 
separate sections per country, where the national section is also a 
national path on its own which in turn consists of several (sometimes 
many) sections.


Directionality  is not a problem with hiking routes, but alternative 
routes and different starting routes are very common and have to be 
accommodated.


I can found some thoughts about it under "relations", but not a clear 
and definite scheme how to do this. Is there a consensus and if so 
where can I find the thematical documentation?


--
Vr gr Peter Elderson



___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Is it possible to have highway=unclassified with ref tag?

[Warin]

+1 with Tod Fitch.
The OSM/UK road types are relevant in the UK, but need to be translated 
for use elsewhere.


On 08/05/18 04:53, Tod Fitch wrote:

I sometimes think those of us who speak a dialect of English other than that of 
the UK should simply view tag values as “code words” and not worry about the 
definition is.

We already have wiki pages dedicated to helping translate local road levels 
into OSM/UK road classifications. Just accept that UK/OSM “unclassified” does 
not mean unclassified in any context other than OSM/UK roads. Just accept that 
it is a meaningless series of letters and could just as easily be something 
like “x23q”. Use it as a code word index into the wiki page for your country on 
what type of road that represents.

Looking at the wiki page for my country’s agreed upon translation, I tag public 
roads that are below that of a tertiary but do not have houses on them as 
“unclassified”. If the agency maintaining the road has placed markers, even 
just little inconspicuous ones, that list their reference ID for the road then 
I consider that fair game to tag as either ref or unsigned_ref (generally I’ll 
go with unsigned ref if the signs are not specifically designed for the 
motorist to see and use for guidance).


On May 7, 2018, at 11:24 AM, Erkin Alp Güney  wrote:

Russia is an example of this, they have many unpaved quarternary and
quinary roads.

07-05-2018 21:13 tarihinde Kevin Kenny yazdı:

On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 12:47 PM, yo paseopor > wrote:

The topic is the classification of OSM is not the same as
countries have, and this make troubles. An UNCLASSIFIED road as
its name says it is unclassified...but when you need some road
classification with a step more than tertiary then you use
unclassified, and if the road has ref...you put in then. Why don't
you reorder the tertiary roads? They also catch your less thant
tertiary roads in your country. Also it is the same problem with
trunk or primary: whatis the difference between trunk of one lane
per direction and a primary road? Also you have the issue if you
consider the administrative classification as we do some
countries: a trunk may be a trunk because being managed by one
specific administration? WTF? Is it good for the map? All the
roads by a local administration should be unclassified? It is a
complicated problem. I suggest to reclassify the other roads in
their grades to make unclassified roads unclassified as the name
says it.


One issue is that we have the "UK English is the language of tagging"
rule - which widely gets interpreted as "highway classification must
be force-fit into the UK system." The US system presents a complex
problem for this, since most highway classification is delegated to
the states, and they all have their own local schemes.

In many counties in the US, rural roads are unnamed and have only
reference numbers. A farm road may be "County Road 2200N" (which is a
different classification from, say, "County Highway 23", and typically
shown only on small blade signs, not banner signs) or "State Farm and
Market Road #2134". As I understand it, it would fit pretty closely
with what "unclassified" roads - which are a formal classification in
the UK! - are understood to be.

Near where I live, numbered 'US', 'State' and many 'County' roads do
NOT reflect the governing body - they are all managed by the state
department of transportation. Historically, they had other structures,
but responsibilities were reallocated. The 'US' highway numbers are
coordinated with neighbouring states, but the administration is by the
state.  There are also numbered but (nearly) unsigned 'reference
routes' also maintained by the state to 'State' highway standards. I
say 'nearly' unsigned because they do often have inconspicuous
chaining markers with their numbers.

Rather than labeling the governing body, the 'US', 'State' and
'County' designations around here reflect the grade of importance,
expected level of traffic and expected quality of maintenance.  Given
that the designation reflects relative importance rather than
administrative jurisdiction, despite the labeling, I'm comfortable
with having US, State, and County numbered roads be 'primary',
'secondary' and 'tertiary' - but in the places where the counties
number virtually every road, there is a need for a tier below
'tertiary' - and 'unclassified' seems to be it; it's a working
category that might otherwise be 'quaternary.'




___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Is it possible to have highway=unclassified with ref tag?

[Warin]

Dave ... careful with the use of logic where OSM tagging is concerned.

The road values come from the UK system, and need to be adapted to other 
places.
So 'unclassified' may be translated to some type of road in another part 
of the world that could carry a reference.



On 07/05/18 22:02, Dave Swarthout wrote:
But when a highway has an officially assigned ref doesn't that define 
it as "classified"? I don't have a large stake in this discussion but 
it would seem to me that any road so ranked by the authorities should 
not be tagged as unclassified.


My 2 cents

Dave

On Sun, May 6, 2018 at 12:19 PM, Andrew Hain 
> wrote:


The use of the ref tag for highway authority road numbers is
controversial in the UK (no road with a signed number would be as
low as highway=unclassified). There may be better examples in
other countries.


--

Andrew




*From:* Philip Barnes >
*Sent:* 06 May 2018 13:28
*To:* tagging@openstreetmap.org 
*Subject:* Re: [Tagging] Is it possible to have
highway=unclassified with ref tag?
On Sun, 2018-05-06 at 09:41 +0200, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
> I am pretty sure that it is entirely possible to have
> highway=unclassified
> with officially assigned and posted ref number, but I wanted to
check
> whatever my edit on
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3

> Dunclassified
> was correct.

It is certainly possible, in the UK all public highways have a
reference number. For lower classifications these references are used
internally by Local Authorities and the references do not appear on
signs. The consensus is that only references that a visible should use
the ref tag in OSM.

For unsigned references we use official_ref and prow_ref which
will not
appear on the standard map but can be rendered on more specialised
maps.

Phil (trigpoint)



___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Is it possible to have highway=unclassified with ref tag?

[Tod Fitch]

I sometimes think those of us who speak a dialect of English other than that of 
the UK should simply view tag values as “code words” and not worry about the 
definition is.

We already have wiki pages dedicated to helping translate local road levels 
into OSM/UK road classifications. Just accept that UK/OSM “unclassified” does 
not mean unclassified in any context other than OSM/UK roads. Just accept that 
it is a meaningless series of letters and could just as easily be something 
like “x23q”. Use it as a code word index into the wiki page for your country on 
what type of road that represents.

Looking at the wiki page for my country’s agreed upon translation, I tag public 
roads that are below that of a tertiary but do not have houses on them as 
“unclassified”. If the agency maintaining the road has placed markers, even 
just little inconspicuous ones, that list their reference ID for the road then 
I consider that fair game to tag as either ref or unsigned_ref (generally I’ll 
go with unsigned ref if the signs are not specifically designed for the 
motorist to see and use for guidance).

> On May 7, 2018, at 11:24 AM, Erkin Alp Güney  wrote:
> 
> Russia is an example of this, they have many unpaved quarternary and
> quinary roads.
> 
> 07-05-2018 21:13 tarihinde Kevin Kenny yazdı:
>> On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 12:47 PM, yo paseopor > > wrote:
>> 
>>The topic is the classification of OSM is not the same as
>>countries have, and this make troubles. An UNCLASSIFIED road as
>>its name says it is unclassified...but when you need some road
>>classification with a step more than tertiary then you use
>>unclassified, and if the road has ref...you put in then. Why don't
>>you reorder the tertiary roads? They also catch your less thant
>>tertiary roads in your country. Also it is the same problem with
>>trunk or primary: whatis the difference between trunk of one lane
>>per direction and a primary road? Also you have the issue if you
>>consider the administrative classification as we do some
>>countries: a trunk may be a trunk because being managed by one
>>specific administration? WTF? Is it good for the map? All the
>>roads by a local administration should be unclassified? It is a
>>complicated problem. I suggest to reclassify the other roads in
>>their grades to make unclassified roads unclassified as the name
>>says it.
>> 
>> 
>> One issue is that we have the "UK English is the language of tagging"
>> rule - which widely gets interpreted as "highway classification must
>> be force-fit into the UK system." The US system presents a complex
>> problem for this, since most highway classification is delegated to
>> the states, and they all have their own local schemes.
>> 
>> In many counties in the US, rural roads are unnamed and have only
>> reference numbers. A farm road may be "County Road 2200N" (which is a
>> different classification from, say, "County Highway 23", and typically
>> shown only on small blade signs, not banner signs) or "State Farm and
>> Market Road #2134". As I understand it, it would fit pretty closely
>> with what "unclassified" roads - which are a formal classification in
>> the UK! - are understood to be. 
>> 
>> Near where I live, numbered 'US', 'State' and many 'County' roads do
>> NOT reflect the governing body - they are all managed by the state
>> department of transportation. Historically, they had other structures,
>> but responsibilities were reallocated. The 'US' highway numbers are
>> coordinated with neighbouring states, but the administration is by the
>> state.  There are also numbered but (nearly) unsigned 'reference
>> routes' also maintained by the state to 'State' highway standards. I
>> say 'nearly' unsigned because they do often have inconspicuous
>> chaining markers with their numbers.  
>> 
>> Rather than labeling the governing body, the 'US', 'State' and
>> 'County' designations around here reflect the grade of importance,
>> expected level of traffic and expected quality of maintenance.  Given
>> that the designation reflects relative importance rather than
>> administrative jurisdiction, despite the labeling, I'm comfortable
>> with having US, State, and County numbered roads be 'primary',
>> 'secondary' and 'tertiary' - but in the places where the counties
>> number virtually every road, there is a need for a tier below
>> 'tertiary' - and 'unclassified' seems to be it; it's a working
>> category that might otherwise be 'quaternary.' 
>> 
>> 
>> ___
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
> 
> 
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


___
Tagging mailing list

Re: [Tagging] Is it possible to have highway=unclassified with ref tag?

[Erkin Alp Güney]

Russia is an example of this, they have many unpaved quarternary and
quinary roads.

07-05-2018 21:13 tarihinde Kevin Kenny yazdı:
> On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 12:47 PM, yo paseopor  > wrote:
>
> The topic is the classification of OSM is not the same as
> countries have, and this make troubles. An UNCLASSIFIED road as
> its name says it is unclassified...but when you need some road
> classification with a step more than tertiary then you use
> unclassified, and if the road has ref...you put in then. Why don't
> you reorder the tertiary roads? They also catch your less thant
> tertiary roads in your country. Also it is the same problem with
> trunk or primary: whatis the difference between trunk of one lane
> per direction and a primary road? Also you have the issue if you
> consider the administrative classification as we do some
> countries: a trunk may be a trunk because being managed by one
> specific administration? WTF? Is it good for the map? All the
> roads by a local administration should be unclassified? It is a
> complicated problem. I suggest to reclassify the other roads in
> their grades to make unclassified roads unclassified as the name
> says it.
>
>
> One issue is that we have the "UK English is the language of tagging"
> rule - which widely gets interpreted as "highway classification must
> be force-fit into the UK system." The US system presents a complex
> problem for this, since most highway classification is delegated to
> the states, and they all have their own local schemes.
>
> In many counties in the US, rural roads are unnamed and have only
> reference numbers. A farm road may be "County Road 2200N" (which is a
> different classification from, say, "County Highway 23", and typically
> shown only on small blade signs, not banner signs) or "State Farm and
> Market Road #2134". As I understand it, it would fit pretty closely
> with what "unclassified" roads - which are a formal classification in
> the UK! - are understood to be. 
>
> Near where I live, numbered 'US', 'State' and many 'County' roads do
> NOT reflect the governing body - they are all managed by the state
> department of transportation. Historically, they had other structures,
> but responsibilities were reallocated. The 'US' highway numbers are
> coordinated with neighbouring states, but the administration is by the
> state.  There are also numbered but (nearly) unsigned 'reference
> routes' also maintained by the state to 'State' highway standards. I
> say 'nearly' unsigned because they do often have inconspicuous
> chaining markers with their numbers.  
>
> Rather than labeling the governing body, the 'US', 'State' and
> 'County' designations around here reflect the grade of importance,
> expected level of traffic and expected quality of maintenance.  Given
> that the designation reflects relative importance rather than
> administrative jurisdiction, despite the labeling, I'm comfortable
> with having US, State, and County numbered roads be 'primary',
> 'secondary' and 'tertiary' - but in the places where the counties
> number virtually every road, there is a need for a tier below
> 'tertiary' - and 'unclassified' seems to be it; it's a working
> category that might otherwise be 'quaternary.' 
>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

[Tagging] Tagging national/international routes.

[Peter Elderson]

I've been searching the wiki's for a good description of how to tag long
hiking routes, particularly compound international routes with separate
sections per country, where the national section is also a national path on
its own which in turn consists of several (sometimes many) sections.

Directionality  is not a problem with hiking routes, but alternative routes
and different starting routes are very common and have to be accommodated.

I can found some thoughts about it under "relations", but not a clear and
definite scheme how to do this. Is there a consensus and if so where can I
find the thematical documentation?

-- 
Vr gr Peter Elderson
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Is it possible to have highway=unclassified with ref tag?

[Erkin Alp Güney]

OSM use is all D roads and rural U roads. Urban U roads are
highway=residential.


07-05-2018 17:35 tarihinde Rory McCann yazdı:
> On 06/05/18 09:41, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
>> I am pretty sure that it is entirely possible to have
>> highway=unclassified
>> with officially assigned and posted ref number, but I wanted to check
>> whatever my edit on
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dunclassified
>> was correct.
>
> Yes it is! AFAIR the "highway=unclassified" comes from British usage,
> where "unclassified" was a road classification. Yes it sound silly. I
> think the refs in the UK aren't signposted, but roads with the
> unclassified classification (!) have "U" refs (e.g. "U123", instead of
> "A123" etc).
>
>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Is it possible to have highway=unclassified with ref tag?

[Kevin Kenny]

On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 12:47 PM, yo paseopor  wrote:

> The topic is the classification of OSM is not the same as countries have,
> and this make troubles. An UNCLASSIFIED road as its name says it is
> unclassified...but when you need some road classification with a step more
> than tertiary then you use unclassified, and if the road has ref...you put
> in then. Why don't you reorder the tertiary roads? They also catch your
> less thant tertiary roads in your country. Also it is the same problem with
> trunk or primary: whatis the difference between trunk of one lane per
> direction and a primary road? Also you have the issue if you consider the
> administrative classification as we do some countries: a trunk may be a
> trunk because being managed by one specific administration? WTF? Is it good
> for the map? All the roads by a local administration should be
> unclassified? It is a complicated problem. I suggest to reclassify the
> other roads in their grades to make unclassified roads unclassified as the
> name says it.
>

One issue is that we have the "UK English is the language of tagging" rule
- which widely gets interpreted as "highway classification must be
force-fit into the UK system." The US system presents a complex problem for
this, since most highway classification is delegated to the states, and
they all have their own local schemes.

In many counties in the US, rural roads are unnamed and have only reference
numbers. A farm road may be "County Road 2200N" (which is a different
classification from, say, "County Highway 23", and typically shown only on
small blade signs, not banner signs) or "State Farm and Market Road #2134".
As I understand it, it would fit pretty closely with what "unclassified"
roads - which are a formal classification in the UK! - are understood to
be.

Near where I live, numbered 'US', 'State' and many 'County' roads do NOT
reflect the governing body - they are all managed by the state department
of transportation. Historically, they had other structures, but
responsibilities were reallocated. The 'US' highway numbers are coordinated
with neighbouring states, but the administration is by the state.  There
are also numbered but (nearly) unsigned 'reference routes' also maintained
by the state to 'State' highway standards. I say 'nearly' unsigned because
they do often have inconspicuous chaining markers with their numbers.

Rather than labeling the governing body, the 'US', 'State' and 'County'
designations around here reflect the grade of importance, expected level of
traffic and expected quality of maintenance.  Given that the designation
reflects relative importance rather than administrative jurisdiction,
despite the labeling, I'm comfortable with having US, State, and County
numbered roads be 'primary', 'secondary' and 'tertiary' - but in the places
where the counties number virtually every road, there is a need for a tier
below 'tertiary' - and 'unclassified' seems to be it; it's a working
category that might otherwise be 'quaternary.'
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Is it possible to have highway=unclassified with ref tag?

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 7. May 2018, at 18:47, yo paseopor  wrote:
> 
> Also it is the same problem with trunk or primary: whatis the difference 
> between trunk of one lane per direction and a primary road?


in Germany and Italy (and probably some more places) the difference is between 
a road section without grade level intersections (and with ramps) vs not. Trunk 
is used in these areas for roads that are built to a standard similar to a 
motorway but not legally designated as motorway. It is not about access 
restrictions (there is the orthogonal motorroad=yes property for this).


cheers,
Martin
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Is it possible to have highway=unclassified with ref tag?

[Paul Johnson]

That's basically the highway=unclassified tag.

On Mon, May 7, 2018, 12:07 Vao Matua  wrote:

> There are many places where people live in Africa that could be tagged as
> Rural_Residential if that tag existed.
>
> On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 9:57 AM, Dave Swarthout 
> wrote:
>
>> yopaseopor wrote: I suggest to reclassify the other roads in their
>> grades to make unclassified roads unclassified as the name says it.
>>
>> +1
>>
>> I agree with your view but this topic is full of issues. In Thailand, for
>> example, we use "unclassified" for any highway that a) has no ref, and b),
>> is neither a service road, track, or residential way. It is essentially a
>> catchall for roads that do not fall into any other category. Again, using
>> Thailand as an example, there are many small, paved roads that have few or
>> no homes on them, sort of like a service road. I think some new category
>> might be warranted. However, proposing such a change and then obtaining
>> consensus is bound to be a difficult process.
>>
>> On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 12:47 PM, yo paseopor 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> The topic is the classification of OSM is not the same as countries
>>> have, and this make troubles. An UNCLASSIFIED road as its name says it is
>>> unclassified...but when you need some road classification with a step more
>>> than tertiary then you use unclassified, and if the road has ref...you put
>>> in then. Why don't you reorder the tertiary roads? They also catch your
>>> less thant tertiary roads in your country. Also it is the same problem with
>>> trunk or primary: whatis the difference between trunk of one lane per
>>> direction and a primary road? Also you have the issue if you consider the
>>> administrative classification as we do some countries: a trunk may be a
>>> trunk because being managed by one specific administration? WTF? Is it good
>>> for the map? All the roads by a local administration should be
>>> unclassified? It is a complicated problem. I suggest to reclassify the
>>> other roads in their grades to make unclassified roads unclassified as the
>>> name says it.
>>>
>>> Salut i carreteres sense classificar (Health and unclassified roads)
>>> yopaseopor
>>>
>>> On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 5:11 PM, Richard Welty 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 On 5/7/18 10:35 AM, Rory McCann wrote:
 > On 06/05/18 09:41, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
 >> I am pretty sure that it is entirely possible to have
 >> highway=unclassified
 >> with officially assigned and posted ref number, but I wanted to check
 >> whatever my edit on
 >> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dunclassified
 >> was correct.
 >
 > Yes it is! AFAIR the "highway=unclassified" comes from British usage,
 > where "unclassified" was a road classification. Yes it sound silly. I
 > think the refs in the UK aren't signposted, but roads with the
 > unclassified classification (!) have "U" refs (e.g. "U123", instead of
 > "A123" etc).
 by convention if a ref is unposted, many folks use unsigned_ref instead
 of ref
 for example, pretty much all the rural paved roads in North Carolina
 have state
 assigned refs, but the ordinary town roads are unposted.

 i can imagine a jurisdiction which uses signed refs on generic
 "unclassified" roads,
 but i've never seen one. i would be reluctant to explicitly rule out the
 possibility.

 richard

 --
 rwe...@averillpark.net
  Averill Park Networking - GIS & IT Consulting
  OpenStreetMap - PostgreSQL - Linux
  Java - Web Applications - Search


 ___
 Tagging mailing list
 Tagging@openstreetmap.org
 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

>>>
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Tagging mailing list
>>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Dave Swarthout
>> Homer, Alaska
>> Chiang Mai, Thailand
>> Travel Blog at http://dswarthout.blogspot.com
>>
>> ___
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>
>>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Is it possible to have highway=unclassified with ref tag?

[Vao Matua]

There are many places where people live in Africa that could be tagged as
Rural_Residential if that tag existed.

On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 9:57 AM, Dave Swarthout 
wrote:

> yopaseopor wrote: I suggest to reclassify the other roads in their grades
> to make unclassified roads unclassified as the name says it.
>
> +1
>
> I agree with your view but this topic is full of issues. In Thailand, for
> example, we use "unclassified" for any highway that a) has no ref, and b),
> is neither a service road, track, or residential way. It is essentially a
> catchall for roads that do not fall into any other category. Again, using
> Thailand as an example, there are many small, paved roads that have few or
> no homes on them, sort of like a service road. I think some new category
> might be warranted. However, proposing such a change and then obtaining
> consensus is bound to be a difficult process.
>
> On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 12:47 PM, yo paseopor  wrote:
>
>> The topic is the classification of OSM is not the same as countries have,
>> and this make troubles. An UNCLASSIFIED road as its name says it is
>> unclassified...but when you need some road classification with a step more
>> than tertiary then you use unclassified, and if the road has ref...you put
>> in then. Why don't you reorder the tertiary roads? They also catch your
>> less thant tertiary roads in your country. Also it is the same problem with
>> trunk or primary: whatis the difference between trunk of one lane per
>> direction and a primary road? Also you have the issue if you consider the
>> administrative classification as we do some countries: a trunk may be a
>> trunk because being managed by one specific administration? WTF? Is it good
>> for the map? All the roads by a local administration should be
>> unclassified? It is a complicated problem. I suggest to reclassify the
>> other roads in their grades to make unclassified roads unclassified as the
>> name says it.
>>
>> Salut i carreteres sense classificar (Health and unclassified roads)
>> yopaseopor
>>
>> On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 5:11 PM, Richard Welty 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 5/7/18 10:35 AM, Rory McCann wrote:
>>> > On 06/05/18 09:41, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
>>> >> I am pretty sure that it is entirely possible to have
>>> >> highway=unclassified
>>> >> with officially assigned and posted ref number, but I wanted to check
>>> >> whatever my edit on
>>> >> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dunclassified
>>> >> was correct.
>>> >
>>> > Yes it is! AFAIR the "highway=unclassified" comes from British usage,
>>> > where "unclassified" was a road classification. Yes it sound silly. I
>>> > think the refs in the UK aren't signposted, but roads with the
>>> > unclassified classification (!) have "U" refs (e.g. "U123", instead of
>>> > "A123" etc).
>>> by convention if a ref is unposted, many folks use unsigned_ref instead
>>> of ref
>>> for example, pretty much all the rural paved roads in North Carolina
>>> have state
>>> assigned refs, but the ordinary town roads are unposted.
>>>
>>> i can imagine a jurisdiction which uses signed refs on generic
>>> "unclassified" roads,
>>> but i've never seen one. i would be reluctant to explicitly rule out the
>>> possibility.
>>>
>>> richard
>>>
>>> --
>>> rwe...@averillpark.net
>>>  Averill Park Networking - GIS & IT Consulting
>>>  OpenStreetMap - PostgreSQL - Linux
>>>  Java - Web Applications - Search
>>>
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Tagging mailing list
>>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Dave Swarthout
> Homer, Alaska
> Chiang Mai, Thailand
> Travel Blog at http://dswarthout.blogspot.com
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Is it possible to have highway=unclassified with ref tag?

[Dave Swarthout]

yopaseopor wrote: I suggest to reclassify the other roads in their grades
to make unclassified roads unclassified as the name says it.

+1

I agree with your view but this topic is full of issues. In Thailand, for
example, we use "unclassified" for any highway that a) has no ref, and b),
is neither a service road, track, or residential way. It is essentially a
catchall for roads that do not fall into any other category. Again, using
Thailand as an example, there are many small, paved roads that have few or
no homes on them, sort of like a service road. I think some new category
might be warranted. However, proposing such a change and then obtaining
consensus is bound to be a difficult process.

On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 12:47 PM, yo paseopor  wrote:

> The topic is the classification of OSM is not the same as countries have,
> and this make troubles. An UNCLASSIFIED road as its name says it is
> unclassified...but when you need some road classification with a step more
> than tertiary then you use unclassified, and if the road has ref...you put
> in then. Why don't you reorder the tertiary roads? They also catch your
> less thant tertiary roads in your country. Also it is the same problem with
> trunk or primary: whatis the difference between trunk of one lane per
> direction and a primary road? Also you have the issue if you consider the
> administrative classification as we do some countries: a trunk may be a
> trunk because being managed by one specific administration? WTF? Is it good
> for the map? All the roads by a local administration should be
> unclassified? It is a complicated problem. I suggest to reclassify the
> other roads in their grades to make unclassified roads unclassified as the
> name says it.
>
> Salut i carreteres sense classificar (Health and unclassified roads)
> yopaseopor
>
> On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 5:11 PM, Richard Welty 
> wrote:
>
>> On 5/7/18 10:35 AM, Rory McCann wrote:
>> > On 06/05/18 09:41, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
>> >> I am pretty sure that it is entirely possible to have
>> >> highway=unclassified
>> >> with officially assigned and posted ref number, but I wanted to check
>> >> whatever my edit on
>> >> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dunclassified
>> >> was correct.
>> >
>> > Yes it is! AFAIR the "highway=unclassified" comes from British usage,
>> > where "unclassified" was a road classification. Yes it sound silly. I
>> > think the refs in the UK aren't signposted, but roads with the
>> > unclassified classification (!) have "U" refs (e.g. "U123", instead of
>> > "A123" etc).
>> by convention if a ref is unposted, many folks use unsigned_ref instead
>> of ref
>> for example, pretty much all the rural paved roads in North Carolina
>> have state
>> assigned refs, but the ordinary town roads are unposted.
>>
>> i can imagine a jurisdiction which uses signed refs on generic
>> "unclassified" roads,
>> but i've never seen one. i would be reluctant to explicitly rule out the
>> possibility.
>>
>> richard
>>
>> --
>> rwe...@averillpark.net
>>  Averill Park Networking - GIS & IT Consulting
>>  OpenStreetMap - PostgreSQL - Linux
>>  Java - Web Applications - Search
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>
>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>


-- 
Dave Swarthout
Homer, Alaska
Chiang Mai, Thailand
Travel Blog at http://dswarthout.blogspot.com
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Is it possible to have highway=unclassified with ref tag?

[yo paseopor]

The topic is the classification of OSM is not the same as countries have,
and this make troubles. An UNCLASSIFIED road as its name says it is
unclassified...but when you need some road classification with a step more
than tertiary then you use unclassified, and if the road has ref...you put
in then. Why don't you reorder the tertiary roads? They also catch your
less thant tertiary roads in your country. Also it is the same problem with
trunk or primary: whatis the difference between trunk of one lane per
direction and a primary road? Also you have the issue if you consider the
administrative classification as we do some countries: a trunk may be a
trunk because being managed by one specific administration? WTF? Is it good
for the map? All the roads by a local administration should be
unclassified? It is a complicated problem. I suggest to reclassify the
other roads in their grades to make unclassified roads unclassified as the
name says it.

Salut i carreteres sense classificar (Health and unclassified roads)
yopaseopor

On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 5:11 PM, Richard Welty 
wrote:

> On 5/7/18 10:35 AM, Rory McCann wrote:
> > On 06/05/18 09:41, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
> >> I am pretty sure that it is entirely possible to have
> >> highway=unclassified
> >> with officially assigned and posted ref number, but I wanted to check
> >> whatever my edit on
> >> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dunclassified
> >> was correct.
> >
> > Yes it is! AFAIR the "highway=unclassified" comes from British usage,
> > where "unclassified" was a road classification. Yes it sound silly. I
> > think the refs in the UK aren't signposted, but roads with the
> > unclassified classification (!) have "U" refs (e.g. "U123", instead of
> > "A123" etc).
> by convention if a ref is unposted, many folks use unsigned_ref instead
> of ref
> for example, pretty much all the rural paved roads in North Carolina
> have state
> assigned refs, but the ordinary town roads are unposted.
>
> i can imagine a jurisdiction which uses signed refs on generic
> "unclassified" roads,
> but i've never seen one. i would be reluctant to explicitly rule out the
> possibility.
>
> richard
>
> --
> rwe...@averillpark.net
>  Averill Park Networking - GIS & IT Consulting
>  OpenStreetMap - PostgreSQL - Linux
>  Java - Web Applications - Search
>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Is it possible to have highway=unclassified with ref tag?

[Richard Welty]

On 5/7/18 10:35 AM, Rory McCann wrote:
> On 06/05/18 09:41, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
>> I am pretty sure that it is entirely possible to have
>> highway=unclassified
>> with officially assigned and posted ref number, but I wanted to check
>> whatever my edit on
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dunclassified
>> was correct.
>
> Yes it is! AFAIR the "highway=unclassified" comes from British usage,
> where "unclassified" was a road classification. Yes it sound silly. I
> think the refs in the UK aren't signposted, but roads with the
> unclassified classification (!) have "U" refs (e.g. "U123", instead of
> "A123" etc). 
by convention if a ref is unposted, many folks use unsigned_ref instead
of ref
for example, pretty much all the rural paved roads in North Carolina
have state
assigned refs, but the ordinary town roads are unposted.

i can imagine a jurisdiction which uses signed refs on generic
"unclassified" roads,
but i've never seen one. i would be reluctant to explicitly rule out the
possibility.

richard

-- 
rwe...@averillpark.net
 Averill Park Networking - GIS & IT Consulting
 OpenStreetMap - PostgreSQL - Linux
 Java - Web Applications - Search


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Is it possible to have highway=unclassified with ref tag?

[Rory McCann]

On 06/05/18 09:41, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:

I am pretty sure that it is entirely possible to have highway=unclassified
with officially assigned and posted ref number, but I wanted to check
whatever my edit on 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dunclassified

was correct.


Yes it is! AFAIR the "highway=unclassified" comes from British usage, 
where "unclassified" was a road classification. Yes it sound silly. I 
think the refs in the UK aren't signposted, but roads with the 
unclassified classification (!) have "U" refs (e.g. "U123", instead of 
"A123" etc).




___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Is it possible to have highway=unclassified with ref tag?

[Dave Swarthout]

But when a highway has an officially assigned ref doesn't that define it as
"classified"? I don't have a large stake in this discussion but it would
seem to me that any road so ranked by the authorities should not be tagged
as unclassified.

My 2 cents

Dave

On Sun, May 6, 2018 at 12:19 PM, Andrew Hain 
wrote:

> The use of the ref tag for highway authority road numbers is controversial
> in the UK (no road with a signed number would be as low as
> highway=unclassified). There may be better examples in other countries.
>
>
> --
>
> Andrew
>
>
> --
> *From:* Philip Barnes 
> *Sent:* 06 May 2018 13:28
> *To:* tagging@openstreetmap.org
> *Subject:* Re: [Tagging] Is it possible to have highway=unclassified with
> ref tag?
>
> On Sun, 2018-05-06 at 09:41 +0200, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
> > I am pretty sure that it is entirely possible to have
> > highway=unclassified
> > with officially assigned and posted ref number, but I wanted to check
> > whatever my edit on https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3
> > Dunclassified
> > was correct.
>
> It is certainly possible, in the UK all public highways have a
> reference number. For lower classifications these references are used
> internally by Local Authorities and the references do not appear on
> signs. The consensus is that only references that a visible should use
> the ref tag in OSM.
>
> For unsigned references we use official_ref and prow_ref which will not
> appear on the standard map but can be rendered on more specialised
> maps.
>
> Phil (trigpoint)
>
>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>


-- 
Dave Swarthout
Homer, Alaska
Chiang Mai, Thailand
Travel Blog at http://dswarthout.blogspot.com
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - key:spacing=*

[Peter Elderson]

It's mainly about the naturals tree_row and forest, they are mapped without
specifying individula trees. Of they contain trees that are in themselves
interesting enough, they can be mapped individually, but most trees are
just trees in a forest or row. A useful atrribute of forest or treerow is
density. This can be easily measured and documented as average spacing.
About the numbers: trees in forests, nobody is going to count them, it's
impossible. Short tree_rows can be counted, but in the Netherlands almost
every road, motorway, swinmming pool, parking lot, park, waterway, farm,
...,  and even forests are lined with tree rows. Often double and triple
rows along hundreds of miles of roads water areas and canals. None of the
separate trees are interesting, but the lining tree_rows and the aspect are
significant elements in de landscape. So nobody is going to count those
trees, let alone map those trees individually. And think of the change
rate, you would need lifetimes just to keep up with small changes, whereas
the forest or tree_row as a whole remains the same.


2018-05-06 22:20 GMT+02:00 Martin Koppenhoefer :

>
>
> sent from a phone
>
> > On 6. May 2018, at 04:36,  <
> osm.tagg...@thorsten.engler.id.au> wrote:
> >
> > Exactly locating and mapping every single tree along a long tree row can
> take hours. And in the majority of cases, you are probably not going to be
> much more exact than a tree_row with spacing would have been, given the
> usual size of trees and the precision you can get from GPS or not
> ultra-high resolution imagery.
>
>
> I tend to disagree, particularly because it can be most interesting to see
> where there are disturbances in the rhythm. „Multiplying“ trees with
> copy+paste is quite fast, the resulting individual trees can be easily
> refined (e.g. species, diameter, can be „virtually logged“ after they fell,
> etc.). Getting to a reasonable spacing distance requires a lot of counting,
> some measurement and a division, or you will end up with cumulative errors
> that start becoming significant.
> Individual trees are better suited for iterative improvements, they are
> simpler to create and easier to maintain. Trees are big enough you don’t
> need super hires imagery.
>
> I agree there are situations where regular spacing would be best recorded
> as a tag, but I wouldn’t count trees in. For a row of bollards or the
> spacing of fence posts (for example) it could make sense.
>
> Cheers,
> Martin
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>



-- 
Vr gr Peter Elderson
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging