Re: [Tagging] how to tag a "highway" that doesn't exist?

[Andy Townsend]

On 23/10/2015 14:34, GerdP wrote:

Andy Townsend wrote

Now, as so many before, I try to find a good tag to express this.
Using a line with only a note tag is no good idea as QA tools
will not like them.

I'd suggest that if a QA tool objects to that, it's a problem with that
QA tool. :)

Well, yes and no. When I start to change all these ways with strange highway
tags to ones with only a note and they pop up in tools like JOSMs validator
it is
likely that the next mapper will invent a new tag or revert my change.




JOSM displays an "untagged ways commented" warning on e.g. 
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/376520283 .  What should happen then is 
that the mapper reads the warning, understands it, and clicks ignore.  
If they just blithely change all data to suppress QA warnings without 
engaging their brain then in my opinion they shouldn't be mapping.


It could be argued that perhaps JOSM shouldn't display this as a warning 
in the first place (though I can see both sides of that argument).  
However, whenever I've raised issues in the past about "what should be a 
validation warning" with JOSM's developers I've always found them very 
responsive.


Cheers,

Andy (SomeoneElse)


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

Re: [Tagging] how to tag a "highway" that doesn't exist?

[GerdP]

Andy Townsend wrote
>> Now, as so many before, I try to find a good tag to express this.
>> Using a line with only a note tag is no good idea as QA tools
>> will not like them.
> 
> I'd suggest that if a QA tool objects to that, it's a problem with that 
> QA tool. :)

Well, yes and no. When I start to change all these ways with strange highway
tags to ones with only a note and they pop up in tools like JOSMs validator
it is 
likely that the next mapper will invent a new tag or revert my change.


Andy Townsend wrote
>> IMHO the only already used tag which looks acceptable
>> for this is
>> highway=none
>> in combination with a note saying why the way is no highway
>> maybe combined with an explicit tag
>> mapping_error=yes
>>
>> Does that make sense?
> 
> Using a highway tag when there isn't a highway is going to cause 
> problems for someone, somewhere down the line - anyone who doesn't look 
> at the values and just processes "highway=*", for example (not that 
> that's a good idea - but someone's going to do it).

Well, that is nearly what happens in the default rules of mkgmap, 
the tool I am helping to develop, see
http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/
It has several rules for the well known highway types and a so called
mop up rule for the rest which is treated like a bad but existing way.
I also try to remove many of the special cases since a few days.
(removed more than 200 until now, taginfo still repors 697 different
highway=* tags)
On the other hand, many of the "wrong" tags are just typos or (iD) merge
errors, 
a highway=primary;residential is likely to be usable, a
highway=primary;contruction 
(note the typo) is probable not. It is nearly impossible to formulate rules
which will use most good cases without possibly matching garbage as well :-(


Andy Townsend wrote
> Some sort of lifecycle tag might work in some cases (though it'd be 
> interesting to see the justification for the "planned but never built, 
> and now never will be built" ones), but even after that there'll always 
> be a small number of odd values - possibly the least worst solution in a 
> particular case.

Well, it seems that highway=proposed is considered to mean "will be there in
the 
future because some government or land owner decided it". 
Some mappers told me that there are stages like "not yet officially
proposed"
which explains the tags like "pre-proposed" or "preproposed"
 (I guess we only need one spelling)

Gerd




--
View this message in context: 
http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/how-to-tag-a-highway-that-doesn-t-exist-tp5857111p5857716.html
Sent from the Tagging mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

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

Re: [Tagging] how to tag a "highway" that doesn't exist?

[Gerd Petermann]

Hi Andy,

okay, I'd be very happy to use only a note for them.

My understanding of the JOSM warning was that there is 
some rule that a note is not enough and that I just didn't
read that rule until now.

Gerd


Von: Andy Townsend 
Gesendet: Freitag, 23. Oktober 2015 15:53
An: tagging@openstreetmap.org
Betreff: Re: [Tagging] how to tag a "highway" that doesn't exist?

On 23/10/2015 14:34, GerdP wrote:
> Andy Townsend wrote
>>> Now, as so many before, I try to find a good tag to express this.
>>> Using a line with only a note tag is no good idea as QA tools
>>> will not like them.
>> I'd suggest that if a QA tool objects to that, it's a problem with that
>> QA tool. :)
> Well, yes and no. When I start to change all these ways with strange highway
> tags to ones with only a note and they pop up in tools like JOSMs validator
> it is
> likely that the next mapper will invent a new tag or revert my change.
>
>

JOSM displays an "untagged ways commented" warning on e.g.
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/376520283 .  What should happen then is
that the mapper reads the warning, understands it, and clicks ignore.
If they just blithely change all data to suppress QA warnings without
engaging their brain then in my opinion they shouldn't be mapping.

It could be argued that perhaps JOSM shouldn't display this as a warning
in the first place (though I can see both sides of that argument).
However, whenever I've raised issues in the past about "what should be a
validation warning" with JOSM's developers I've always found them very
responsive.

Cheers,

Andy (SomeoneElse)


___
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 a "highway" that doesn't exist?

[Andy Townsend]

On 22/10/2015 11:18, Colin Smale wrote:


On 2015-10-22 11:27, Andy Townsend wrote:



I'd agree with that.  I can think of more than a few examples of "the 
road/path used to go here, but now it doesn't", and even if the 
imagery gets updated, underlying GPS traces won't.
Has anyone thought of a way of limiting returned GPS traces to a 
certain date range? So you can look at traces since or before a 
certain change in the road layout?




It's tricky, since the traces involved aren't just the OSM ones - they 
also include Strava and potentially others.


With regard to OSM ones, in JOSM you can get information on some traces 
trace-by-trace, but it's a bit clumsy to use regularly. Traces in P2 and 
iD's "GPS traces tiles" such as 
http://gps-b.tile.openstreetmap.org/lines/15/16256/10660.png via 
https://github.com/ericfischer/gpx-updater are one-way I believe - GPS 
traces go in, but never come out.


Cheers,

Andy

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

Re: [Tagging] how to tag a "highway" that doesn't exist?

[Andy Townsend]

On 22/10/2015 06:29, GerdP wrote:

Hi all,

I've contacted a few mappers and it seems that there is a need
to keep some of the ways for the reason described by Mateusz below.


I'd agree with that.  I can think of more than a few examples of "the 
road/path used to go here, but now it doesn't", and even if the imagery 
gets updated, underlying GPS traces won't.



Now, as so many before, I try to find a good tag to express this.
Using a line with only a note tag is no good idea as QA tools
will not like them.


I'd suggest that if a QA tool objects to that, it's a problem with that 
QA tool. :)



IMHO the only already used tag which looks acceptable
for this is
highway=none
in combination with a note saying why the way is no highway
maybe combined with an explicit tag
mapping_error=yes

Does that make sense?


Using a highway tag when there isn't a highway is going to cause 
problems for someone, somewhere down the line - anyone who doesn't look 
at the values and just processes "highway=*", for example (not that 
that's a good idea - but someone's going to do it).


Some sort of lifecycle tag might work in some cases (though it'd be 
interesting to see the justification for the "planned but never built, 
and now never will be built" ones), but even after that there'll always 
be a small number of odd values - possibly the least worst solution in a 
particular case.


Cheers,

Andy


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

Re: [Tagging] how to tag a "highway" that doesn't exist?

[Colin Smale]

 

On 2015-10-22 11:27, Andy Townsend wrote: 

> I'd agree with that.  I can think of more than a few examples of "the 
> road/path used to go here, but now it doesn't", and even if the imagery gets 
> updated, underlying GPS traces won't.

Has anyone thought of a way of limiting returned GPS traces to a certain
date range? So you can look at traces since or before a certain change
in the road layout? 

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

Re: [Tagging] how to tag a "highway" that doesn't exist?

[Tom Pfeifer]

Andy Townsend wrote on 2015-10-22 12:46:

On 22/10/2015 11:18, Colin Smale wrote:


On 2015-10-22 11:27, Andy Townsend wrote:



I'd agree with that.  I can think of more than a few examples of "the road/path used 
to go here, but now it doesn't", and even if the imagery gets updated, underlying 
GPS traces won't.

Has anyone thought of a way of limiting returned GPS traces to a certain date 
range? So you can look at traces since or before a certain change in the road 
layout?



It's tricky, since the traces involved aren't just the OSM ones - they also 
include Strava and potentially others.

With regard to OSM ones, in JOSM you can get information on some traces trace-by-trace, 
but it's a bit clumsy to use regularly. Traces in P2 and iD's "GPS traces 
tiles" such as http://gps-b.tile.openstreetmap.org/lines/15/16256/10660.png via
https://github.com/ericfischer/gpx-updater are one-way I believe - GPS traces 
go in, but never come out.


In JOSM you can filter the loaded GPX tracks by date. In the layer list, 
right-click the GPX data,
select the funnel icon "choose visible tracks". It provides you with a slider 
mode to select a
specific from-to date range. Very useful when the road layout has changed, e.g. 
a roundabout been built.

(in this context, the InfoMode plugin provides you further information about 
tracks and trackpoints interactively.)
tom


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

Re: [Tagging] how to tag a "highway" that doesn't exist?

[GerdP]

Hi all,

I've contacted a few mappers and it seems that there is a need 
to keep some of the ways for the reason described by Mateusz below.

Now, as so many before, I try to find a good tag to express this.
Using a line with only a note tag is no good idea as QA tools
will not like them. IMHO the only already used tag which looks acceptable 
for this is
highway=none 
in combination with a note saying why the way is no highway
maybe combined with an explicit tag
mapping_error=yes

Does that make sense?

Gerd



Mateusz Konieczny-2 wrote
> On Thu, 15 Oct 2015 13:35:08 +
> Gerd Petermann 

> gpetermann_muenchen@

>  wrote:
> 
>> Hi all,
>> 
>> forgive me if this was discussed before:
>> There seems to be a need to map highways which do not exist.
>> I understand the idea that we map highway=proposed / highway=planned
>> as this might be used to visualize a plan, I can also understand that
>> we have tags like highway=dismantled and highway=razed (which seem to
>> mean the same) but why do we have ways with
>> highway=x-residential , highway=unbuilt ,  highway=neverbuilt, and
>> several more with similar meaning ?
>> They all seem to describe ways which where once added as normal
>> highway=* to the database and later someone found out that there is
>> no highway, but did not dare to remove the way.
>> 
>> Is that meant to document something important?
>> 
>> Gerd
>> 
> 
> Purpose of such objects is to ensure that armchair mappers will not
> remap it again. Object with note=* seem better than highway=neverbuilt.
> 
> In case of low risk of remapping by armachair mappers such ways may be
> safely deleted.
> 
> ___
> Tagging mailing list

> Tagging@

> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging





--
View this message in context: 
http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/how-to-tag-a-highway-that-doesn-t-exist-tp5857111p5857582.html
Sent from the Tagging mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

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

Re: [Tagging] how to tag a "highway" that doesn't exist?

[Gerd Petermann]

Hi Hans,


thanks for the offer. I still try to decide what to do with these elements.

In some cases it is obvious that editors have invested time to document

something, so I'd not want to simply delete their work.

I guess I'll start to comment those changesets which introduced the

unusual highway=* tag and ask if a replacement to note:highway=*

or something similar would be okay.

If you think that this is a good idea, just do the same.


Gerd



Von: Hans De Kryger 
Gesendet: Samstag, 17. Oktober 2015 02:27
An: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools
Cc: Gerd Petermann
Betreff: Re: [Tagging] how to tag a "highway" that doesn't exist?

Let me know if you need any help.

Regards,
Hans

http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/TheDutchMan13
[http://www.openstreetmap.org/assets/osm_logo-0e19527a1cc9fdf566c217d6e1863d88cac7bb743914792dea5d8db813501ad6.png]

OpenStreetMap | TheDutchMan13
OpenStreetMap is the free wiki world map. ... "Changing the world one edit at a 
time" In love with OpenStreetMap! I mostly map within the borders of Arizona.
Weitere Informationen...



On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 12:25 PM, Mateusz Konieczny 
> wrote:
On Thu, 15 Oct 2015 13:35:08 +
Gerd Petermann 
> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> forgive me if this was discussed before:
> There seems to be a need to map highways which do not exist.
> I understand the idea that we map highway=proposed / highway=planned
> as this might be used to visualize a plan, I can also understand that
> we have tags like highway=dismantled and highway=razed (which seem to
> mean the same) but why do we have ways with
> highway=x-residential , highway=unbuilt ,  highway=neverbuilt, and
> several more with similar meaning ?
> They all seem to describe ways which where once added as normal
> highway=* to the database and later someone found out that there is
> no highway, but did not dare to remove the way.
>
> Is that meant to document something important?
>
> Gerd
>

Purpose of such objects is to ensure that armchair mappers will not
remap it again. Object with note=* seem better than highway=neverbuilt.

In case of low risk of remapping by armachair mappers such ways may be
safely deleted.

___
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] how to tag a "highway" that doesn't exist?

[Gerd Petermann]

Hi all,

forgive me if this was discussed before:
There seems to be a need to map highways which do not exist.
I understand the idea that we map highway=proposed / highway=planned
as this might be used to visualize a plan, I can also understand that we
have tags like highway=dismantled and highway=razed (which seem to mean the 
same)
but why do we have ways with
highway=x-residential , highway=unbuilt ,  highway=neverbuilt, and several
more with similar meaning ?
They all seem to describe ways which where once added as normal highway=*
to the database and later someone found out that there is no highway,
but did not dare to remove the way.

Is that meant to document something important?

Gerd

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

Re: [Tagging] how to tag a "highway" that doesn't exist?

[Hans De Kryger]

Do you have any examples?
On Oct 15, 2015 12:27 PM, "Mateusz Konieczny"  wrote:

> On Thu, 15 Oct 2015 13:35:08 +
> Gerd Petermann  wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > forgive me if this was discussed before:
> > There seems to be a need to map highways which do not exist.
> > I understand the idea that we map highway=proposed / highway=planned
> > as this might be used to visualize a plan, I can also understand that
> > we have tags like highway=dismantled and highway=razed (which seem to
> > mean the same) but why do we have ways with
> > highway=x-residential , highway=unbuilt ,  highway=neverbuilt, and
> > several more with similar meaning ?
> > They all seem to describe ways which where once added as normal
> > highway=* to the database and later someone found out that there is
> > no highway, but did not dare to remove the way.
> >
> > Is that meant to document something important?
> >
> > Gerd
> >
>
> Purpose of such objects is to ensure that armchair mappers will not
> remap it again. Object with note=* seem better than highway=neverbuilt.
>
> In case of low risk of remapping by armachair mappers such ways may be
> safely deleted.
>
> ___
> 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 a "highway" that doesn't exist?

[Mateusz Konieczny]

On Thu, 15 Oct 2015 13:35:08 +
Gerd Petermann  wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
> forgive me if this was discussed before:
> There seems to be a need to map highways which do not exist.
> I understand the idea that we map highway=proposed / highway=planned
> as this might be used to visualize a plan, I can also understand that
> we have tags like highway=dismantled and highway=razed (which seem to
> mean the same) but why do we have ways with
> highway=x-residential , highway=unbuilt ,  highway=neverbuilt, and
> several more with similar meaning ?
> They all seem to describe ways which where once added as normal
> highway=* to the database and later someone found out that there is
> no highway, but did not dare to remove the way.
> 
> Is that meant to document something important?
> 
> Gerd
> 

Purpose of such objects is to ensure that armchair mappers will not
remap it again. Object with note=* seem better than highway=neverbuilt.

In case of low risk of remapping by armachair mappers such ways may be
safely deleted.

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