Re: [Tagging] How to tag shared waterway highway

[Michael Patrick]

Similar to 'ice roads'  in Canada
and Siberia. Minnesota .
In Oregon wet-sand portion of the state’s beaches have been set aside as a
state highway .
Not roads,but a trails, In Montana, with some access restrictions, one can
traverse any property below the high watermark
.

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

Re: [Tagging] Can OSM become a geospacial database?

[Michael Patrick]

> From: Martin Koppenhoefer 
> thank you for the references to the specific standards. I’m going to look
> more into it. Problem is if these are hundreds of pages most people will
> not look the tags up ;-)
>

You're welcome, and I totally agree with your observation, especially
considering the international basis of OSM. And thanks for even taking a
passing interest in the topic. It is a "red-headed stepchild
" sort of issue, and
because it cuts across just about every community and portion of the OSM
technology stack, and any effort to apply the known solutions would
automatically generate a lot of animosity immediately, even if long-term it
made life easier and more inclusive of local variation -  that is what
happens outside of OSM, it's not specific to OSM.

I wouldn't expect individuals to look through hundreds of pages, any
eventual solution would require a technology stack to assist the user, like
a child using a botany key to find a species name in Latin in a couple of
steps. And I respectfully submit that situation already exists, like with
the user-defined 'amenity' tag (  9261items, 441 'pages'
). Addressing the
situation rubs up against too many OSM culture themes, similar to large
scale import or automatic edits. It is most likely easier to address
outside of OSM, along with some sort of ODBL 'firewall' insulation ( like
the NPS  ). The NGA most likely
does this sort of thing
,
with tools like Hootenanny 


> Do they not have grade eight roofers in the US?
>

True, to great extent, but the absence of an 8 in this case is not because
of that. Actually there is a skills shortage crisis for all the trades in
the U.S. ... the bulk of tradesmen in the country are retiring or near
retirement in the next decade.

Somewhat off-topic for OSM, but it is a sort of 'tagging' schema.

The example text was pulled from the somewhat arcane U.S. Federal Wage
Scales, where specific pay grades are then extracted to fit local
conditions, especially trade union classifications - i.e. another area or
skill might use 2,3,5,8,9.

Depending on the trade an apprenticeship program will range widely from 1
year to 6 years. Depending on the industry, the journeymen phase, it
becomes even wider, for example the nuclear industry trades include "Basic
Atomic & Nuclear Physics", "Heat Transfer & Fluid Flow"- in the U.K., I
recall, you get a BEng in Nuclear Engineering out of some of the trade
apprenticeships.  The Federal Grades are linear, and particular grades are
selected that match specialization and trade for a given area, and that
isn't always numerically 'linear'.

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

Re: [Tagging] How to tag shared waterway highway

[Warin]

On 09/12/18 02:50, Tod Fitch wrote:


It would be nice if there was a way to tag the intermittent flow as ephemeral 
but that has been “bike shedded” to death here before. I know/hope that anyone 
local will have a pretty good idea about whether or not there is likely to be 
water in the drainage (a summer cloudburst locally or in the adjacent higher 
ground) and be smart enough not to enter it for the couple of hours that a 
water event is likely to last.



Simply start using it ...

ephemeral=yes

Many tags start without any discussion here.


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

Re: [Tagging] How to tag shared waterway highway

[Tod Fitch]

> On Dec 8, 2018, at 2:31 AM, Joseph Eisenberg  
> wrote:
> 
> I would recommend drawing a separate “way” for the highway. I imagine that 
> the route taken by vehicles or people walking is a few meters off of the 
> center of the waterway, and perhaps a little straighter. If you are coarsest 
> tracing the waterway and road, then the two ways might share most of their 
> nodes.

As soon as I got to your “I imagine that” I decided you’ve no experience in 
this and I should discount anything that follows.

In the desert southwest of the United States where I was raised they call the 
usually dry water courses a “wash”. And they are often used for vehicle travel 
when dry which is almost all of the time. In hilly or mountainous areas the 
width of the waterway is often no wider than most vehicles so there is no place 
“a few meters off the center of the waterway”. And my experience in 
walking/hiking along them is you are often in the middle of the most recent 
route of flood waters as the walking is easier there (less debris, etc.).

 I don’t like the OSM mapping options but what I’ve settled on is a single way 
tagged as:

ford=yes
highway=track
intermittent=yes
surface=sand
waterway=stream

Some of the washes have names. Some of the tracks have names. Sometimes they 
both have names and occasionally the two names differ. I haven’t a solution for 
that.

It would be nice if there was a way to tag the intermittent flow as ephemeral 
but that has been “bike shedded” to death here before. I know/hope that anyone 
local will have a pretty good idea about whether or not there is likely to be 
water in the drainage (a summer cloudburst locally or in the adjacent higher 
ground) and be smart enough not to enter it for the couple of hours that a 
water event is likely to last.

Cheers!



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] How to tag shared waterway highway

[Yves]

There's two solutions:
A single way tagged highway and waterway.
Or two ways sharing some nodes or not, one tagged as a highway with an 
additional tag saying it can be flooded, and the other a waterway with an 
additional tag cause it can be dry, and another tag saying you may encounter 
cars on it.
Yves 

Le 8 décembre 2018 10:25:49 GMT+01:00, ??? ?? ? -? Dar 
Alathar-Yemen  a écrit :
>Many waterways (wadis) in our region used as roads when no rain days.
>How to tag them? is it allowed to use (waterway + highway) in same way?
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Mapping disputed boundaries (Version 1.3)

[Johnparis]

Thanks, Andy. I replied to some of your comments (which I also copied to
the proposal's discussion page).

So far as I know you're the first to publicly question the use of land
boundaries, but as I fully believe in Keep It Simple, I'm happy to do that.
It's not a major change, though I will probably do it as a version 1.4 and
redo the examples. I can also do a ChangeLog for the proposal, though I
really have pretty much discarded the earlier ones. I'll wait a bit to see
if there are other comments on version 1.3, then dive in.

Briefly, without seeing at least one example for the other proposal, I
don't think it's reasonable to assume it will be easier to implement. It is
essentially an extension of my proposal (views of third parties on claims),
but without the modularity introduced by the zones of control.

As for implementing my proposal, I believe I could create all the relations
in a couple of weeks, tops. It took me a couple of hours for
Israel-Palestine, for instance -- and that was on the dev server, where I
had to download and reupload all the relations. So I think I've
demonstrated that my proposal is pretty easy to implement. For any
countries with no active disputes, there's no change needed at all.

Since the nature of the disputes rarely changes (most have been "frozen"
for some time), there really aren't maintenance issues. By contrast, for
the other proposal, the third party views do change, so there is a
maintenance issue there (or for any extension that wants to include those).
Not to mention the separate issue of verifiability of the third-party
views.

And for "hot" disputes, where the boundaries do in fact change, my proposal
would require changing the boundaries of the affected zones of control
(usually two) and regenerating the De Facto Boundary for the two countries
(two, for a total of four including the zones of control). And I note that
even with the current map, the de facto boundary would need to be changed
(revising two relations), so from a maintenance standpoint my proposal is
essentially the same as what we have now. The other proposal would require
changes in all the relations affecting each of the two countries.

Ease of use? I don't see how it can be simpler than to call up "Master
Boundary India" to see India's view of itself. The pre-built relations
include every country's self-view.

Cheers,
John





On Sat, Dec 8, 2018 at 11:42 AM Andy Townsend  wrote:

> On 05/12/2018 18:52, Johnparis wrote:
> > I have just posted another revised version of my proposal on mapping
> > disputed boundaries.
> >
> > It greatly simplifies the tagging and relation structure.
>
> One thing that would be really helpful would be to summarise those
> changes somewhere.  There's a whole page at the top of
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Mapping_disputed_boundaries
> devoted to contents; nothing there suggests what has changed.  The
> difference between 1.2 and now
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Proposed_features%2FMapping_disputed_boundaries=revision=1704857=1702873
> doesn't really help, except to show that the tagging has moved somewhat
> away from a "rewrite of all OSM boundaries" towards at least some of the
> tagging that we have now.
>
>
> >
> > Thanks to everyone who gave public and private feedback. I've archived
> > some of the comments that are no longer applicable.
> >
> > The proposal is here:
> >
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Mapping_disputed_boundaries
>
>
> Thanks also for adding the
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/ClaimedBorders#Comparison_with_other_proposal
> section to the other proposal.  I've commented there why I think
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/ClaimedBorders is
> probably easier to implement, easier to use, and easier to maintain than
> this one, but there is still some useful detail here - not least the
> definitions, including things like "Claiming Entity"
>
> Arguably the biggest difference between the two proposals (and between
> yours and what OSM does now) is that your proposal talks only about land
> areas - I suspect that that will make yours difficult to implement at
> all; and (as many people have said) we definitely need a solution here.
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Andy
>
>
>
> ___
> 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] How to tag shared waterway highway

[Andy Townsend]

On 08/12/2018 11:19, Warin wrote:


Fords are where the water runs across the road.. not along with it... 
at least that is the common situation here.



We have more water than you :)

A regular ford does just go across the road, but one that shares the 
road for a bit is called a "long ford". 
https://map.atownsend.org.uk/maps/map/map.html#zoom=20=53.137329=-1.468145 
is an example (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/42000985 in OSM).


Best Regards,

Andy



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

Re: [Tagging] How to tag shared waterway highway

[Warin]

On 08/12/18 21:57, Andy Townsend wrote:

On 08/12/2018 10:31, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
I would recommend drawing a separate “way” for the highway. I imagine 
that the route taken by vehicles or people walking is a few meters 
off of the center of the waterway, and perhaps a little straighter. 
If you are coarsest tracing the waterway and road, then the two ways 
might share most of their nodes.



Drawing separate ways for highway and waterway but sharing the same 
nodes will also lead to problems - there's no way that data consumers 
will know that this highway is also a waterway.  If you're going to do 
that then you'll need to add some other tag to the highway to say "you 
may get wet".


My experience:
You may get wet ...once in twenty years.
You will get bogged trying to get to them. Most people set up camp and 
wait for the road to dry out.
Local councils usually have fines in place for people that travel on 
their roads in wet conditions and damage them... ones I have been told 
of were $1000 per vehicle axle but that was many years ago, probable 
gone up since then.

(Think of an Australian 'road train' with ~13 axles)



Highways and waterways using exactly the same route is pretty common 
where I am in the UK - they're called "long fords" (we don't have many 
wadis), and a ford=yes tag allows renderers to process them.  I'd 
imagine for wadis some other tag (maybe some sort of "hazard"?) would 
be more appropriate, but it needs something.


Fords are where the water runs across the road.. not along with it... at 
least that is the common situation here.


I do know of one that follows the creek bed for some distance .. and 
that one is wet most of the time. And it is a rocky bottom.


It would be nice to be able to tag them -
water frequency, depth?, ?
road 'surface' (once through any water), ?

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

Re: [Tagging] How to tag shared waterway highway

[Warin]

On 08/12/18 21:31, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
I would recommend drawing a separate “way” for the highway. I imagine 
that the route taken by vehicles or people walking is a few meters off 
of the center of the waterway, and perhaps a little straighter. If you 
are coarsest tracing the waterway and road, then the two ways might 
share most of their nodes.


I don't think you have used them. The ones I have used:
The waterway will vary from one flow to the next by some meters - they 
are sand bottoms. The rivers when flowing are 10s of metres wide.

Some flood in flatter areas.
The road/track will change after a rain event by meters to make best use 
of the changed topography.

The are mostly sandy bottoms - meters wide. Take a look at the Todd River in
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/ephemeral#Examples

The way shown in OSM (or any map) is a guide.
I would not take the trouble to offset one from the other, if it were 
done then it is bound to be on the wrong side :)


On Sat, Dec 8, 2018 at 7:28 PM Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com 
> wrote:


On 08/12/18 20:25, ??? ?? ? -? Dar
Alathar-Yemen wrote:


Many waterways (wadis) in our region used as roads when no rain days.

How to tag them? is it allowed to use (waterway + highway) in
same way?



Similar problems in Australia


Many ephemeral rivers are used for vehicles and some are used as
hiking paths.


For the hiking paths as these are routes I have simply made them
into members of the route.


Tagging both as highway + waterway will lead to problems.


Using the route relation has worked for the hiking trails that I
have done so far.

That might work for highways too, make a relation with the normal
highways and waterways as a route.



___
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] How to tag shared waterway highway

[Andy Townsend]

On 08/12/2018 10:31, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
I would recommend drawing a separate “way” for the highway. I imagine 
that the route taken by vehicles or people walking is a few meters off 
of the center of the waterway, and perhaps a little straighter. If you 
are coarsest tracing the waterway and road, then the two ways might 
share most of their nodes.



Drawing separate ways for highway and waterway but sharing the same 
nodes will also lead to problems - there's no way that data consumers 
will know that this highway is also a waterway.  If you're going to do 
that then you'll need to add some other tag to the highway to say "you 
may get wet".


Highways and waterways using exactly the same route is pretty common 
where I am in the UK - they're called "long fords" (we don't have many 
wadis), and a ford=yes tag allows renderers to process them.  I'd 
imagine for wadis some other tag (maybe some sort of "hazard"?) would be 
more appropriate, but it needs something.


Best Regards,

Andy



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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Mapping disputed boundaries (Version 1.3)

[Andy Townsend]

On 05/12/2018 18:52, Johnparis wrote:
I have just posted another revised version of my proposal on mapping 
disputed boundaries.


It greatly simplifies the tagging and relation structure.


One thing that would be really helpful would be to summarise those 
changes somewhere.  There's a whole page at the top of 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Mapping_disputed_boundaries 
devoted to contents; nothing there suggests what has changed.  The 
difference between 1.2 and now 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Proposed_features%2FMapping_disputed_boundaries=revision=1704857=1702873 
doesn't really help, except to show that the tagging has moved somewhat 
away from a "rewrite of all OSM boundaries" towards at least some of the 
tagging that we have now.





Thanks to everyone who gave public and private feedback. I've archived 
some of the comments that are no longer applicable.


The proposal is here:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Mapping_disputed_boundaries



Thanks also for adding the 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/ClaimedBorders#Comparison_with_other_proposal 
section to the other proposal.  I've commented there why I think 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/ClaimedBorders is 
probably easier to implement, easier to use, and easier to maintain than 
this one, but there is still some useful detail here - not least the 
definitions, including things like "Claiming Entity"


Arguably the biggest difference between the two proposals (and between 
yours and what OSM does now) is that your proposal talks only about land 
areas - I suspect that that will make yours difficult to implement at 
all; and (as many people have said) we definitely need a solution here.


Best Regards,

Andy



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

Re: [Tagging] How to tag shared waterway highway

[Joseph Eisenberg]

I would recommend drawing a separate “way” for the highway. I imagine that
the route taken by vehicles or people walking is a few meters off of the
center of the waterway, and perhaps a little straighter. If you are
coarsest tracing the waterway and road, then the two ways might share most
of their nodes.
On Sat, Dec 8, 2018 at 7:28 PM Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 08/12/18 20:25, ??? ?? ? -? Dar Alathar-Yemen wrote:
>
> Many waterways (wadis) in our region used as roads when no rain days.
>
> How to tag them? is it allowed to use (waterway + highway) in same way?
>
>
>
>
> Similar problems in Australia
>
>
> Many ephemeral rivers are used for vehicles and some are used as hiking
> paths.
>
>
> For the hiking paths as these are routes I have simply made them into
> members of the route.
>
>
> Tagging both as highway + waterway will lead to problems.
>
>
> Using the route relation has worked for the hiking trails that I have done
> so far.
>
> That might work for highways too, make a relation with the normal
> highways and waterways as a route.
>
>
>
> ___
> 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] How to tag shared waterway highway

[Warin]

On 08/12/18 20:25, ??? ?? ? -? Dar Alathar-Yemen wrote:


Many waterways (wadis) in our region used as roads when no rain days.

How to tag them? is it allowed to use (waterway + highway) in same way?



Similar problems in Australia


Many ephemeral rivers are used for vehicles and some are used as hiking 
paths.



For the hiking paths as these are routes I have simply made them into 
members of the route.



Tagging both as highway + waterway will lead to problems.


Using the route relation has worked for the hiking trails that I have 
done so far.


That might work for highways too, make a relation with the normal 
highways and waterways as a route.




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

[Tagging] How to tag shared waterway highway

[??? ?????? ????? ????????-????? Dar Alathar-Yemen]

Many waterways (wadis) in our region used as roads when no rain days.
How to tag them? is it allowed to use (waterway + highway) in same way?


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