: tagging@openstreetmap.org
Betreff: Re: [Tagging] improve tagging of traffic_calming
On 20/11/15 15:19, GerdP wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I've noticed that a few (940) traffic_calmings are mapped as
> highway=traffic_calming , most of them also have the tag
> traffic_calming=*, but ~ 10% d
I think what Gerd is saying is that if we deprecate the use of
highway=traffic_calming and instead tag each way segment with just
traffic_calming=* (or simply use a node in those case where the structure
of the device is short), we would eliminate the issue where, for example, a
secondary highway c
Javbw
> On Nov 22, 2015, at 9:35 AM, John Willis wrote:
>
> large sections of them on rural roads before dangerous curves
These are heavily signed as being dangerous to fast moving motorcycles in the
curves, so they are a good thing to map. They have them there to make the
motorcyclists slo
Besides the way segmentation, which I don't care about at all (because it more
accurately reflects the realities of the road) - does tagging a way segment
with traffic_calming=* present a problem? I realize then I can't use
highway=traffic_calming on the way (because it is already highway=second
sent from a phone
> Am 21.11.2015 um 17:07 schrieb Gerd Petermann
> :
>
> As I said, I have no problem with them. The important part is
> that you don't cut e.g. a highway=secondary into small fragments with
> alternating highway=traffic_calming,highway=secondary,
> highway=traffic_calming,
>
sent from a phone
> Am 21.11.2015 um 17:07 schrieb Gerd Petermann
> :
>
> Some mappers see way segmentation as a problem, esp. when it comes to
> waterways.
> As I said, I have no problem with them.
with the current model, way fragmentation is unavoidable when people add a lot
of details to
John Willis wrote
>> On Nov 22, 2015, at 12:16 AM, Gerd Petermann <
> gpetermann_muenchen@
> > wrote:
>>
>> highway=traffic_calming for the small way segments when we tell them
>> to use it for nodes. My understanding is that this is not wanted.
>
> I have a question about this.
>
> If I am m
> On Nov 22, 2015, at 12:16 AM, Gerd Petermann
> wrote:
>
> highway=traffic_calming for the small way segments when we tell them
> to use it for nodes. My understanding is that this is not wanted.
I have a question about this.
If I am mapping from the newest ~5cm imagery in Tokyo, I can dra
Dave Swarthout wrote
> *If we move traffic_calming to the "Other highway features"category we
> will
> probably see more ways segmented into highway=residentialand
> highway=traffic_calming bits, and I think that would be a step back.My
> conclusion so far: the wiki is missleading and most mappers
On Sat, Nov 21, 2015 at 3:51 AM, Dave Swarthout
wrote:
>
> I reckon I wouldn't have a problem with doing that. I have always used
> only a node for the traffic_calming devices I've encountered but I can see
> how splitting a way to make it a table or chicane might be problematical.
> But then how
*If we move traffic_calming to the "Other highway features"category we will
probably see more ways segmented into highway=residentialand
highway=traffic_calming bits, and I think that would be a step back.My
conclusion so far: the wiki is missleading and most mappers have learnedto
use traffic_calm
On Sat, Nov 21, 2015 at 4:36 PM, Dave Swarthout
wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 21, 2015 at 4:05 PM, Gerd Petermann <
> gpetermann_muenc...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Well, of course diversity in tagging is a problem. For each data consumer
>> and
>> for each new mapper who tries to find out how to map someth
+1 to that.
On 2015-11-21 10:15, Dave Swarthout wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 21, 2015 at 4:05 PM, Gerd Petermann
> wrote:
>
>> Well, of course diversity in tagging is a problem. For each data consumer
>> and
>> for each new mapper who tries to find out how to map something so that their
>> prefer
On Sat, Nov 21, 2015 at 4:05 PM, Gerd Petermann <
gpetermann_muenc...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Well, of course diversity in tagging is a problem. For each data consumer
> and
> for each new mapper who tries to find out how to map something so that
> their
> preferred OSM-data-consuming-program is und
Dave Swarthout wrote
> Sorry all. I'm on Thailand time and had to sleep.
>
> The highway=traffic_calming key is found on the top level highway page
> here: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:highway. On that page a link
> to the types of traffic_calming device appears:
> http://wiki.openstreet
On Sat, Nov 21, 2015 at 4:05 PM, Gerd Petermann <
gpetermann_muenc...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Well, of course diversity in tagging is a problem. For each data consumer
> and
> for each new mapper who tries to find out how to map something so that
> their
> preferred OSM-data-consuming-program is und
Paul Johnson-3 wrote
>> >
>> Most traffic calming features are not pedestrian crossings.
>>
>> Where traffic_calming is not a pedestrian crossing then
>> highway=traffic_calming is the prefered way of tagging.
>>
>
> Where are you getting this impression from? None of the JOSM presets, the
> wiki
>I haven't seen humps that have crossings on them, but I have seen tables
Yes, that is what I was referring to. I called them 'humps" in my hurry to
get my reply off but they are more properly called "tables" and Eugene is
the only place I've seen them. I don't think I've ever tagged any, so far,
Chris Hill-6 wrote
> On 20/11/15 16:47, Gerd Petermann wrote:
>>
>> So you think that every node tagged traffic_calming=* should
>>
>> additionally be tagged with highway=traffic_calming?
>>
>> That would mean we have >99% traffic_calming nodes with
>>
>> incorrect tagging.
>>
>>
>>
> I think you
On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 12:31 PM, Philip Barnes
wrote:
> On Fri, 2015-11-20 at 11:22 -0700, Tod Fitch wrote:
> > A raised area several feet across with a marked crosswalk on top is
> > not uncommon in Silicon Valley and more of them seem to appearing in
> > residential areas. I suspect that it is
On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 10:41 AM, Dave Swarthout
wrote:
> But they are definitely not crossings. I've seen a few traffic_calming
> "humps" (a longer bump) that have a crossing on them in Eugene, Oregon, but
> they are unusual, not the normal case.
I haven't seen humps that have crossings on the
On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 10:10 AM, Rafael Avila Coya
wrote:
> Hi:
>
> What happens when a traffic calming is a crossing for pedestrians at the
> same time? I have some examples in this avenue of my home town where I
> live: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1080908514
Traffic calming goes in th
Dave F. wrote
> Why is your display name different for what appears to be the exact same
> email address? So bloody annoying
Yes, and I hope that I've now found the right way to change that.
I often use the GIS interface to write posts as it is much easier to use
then the interface provided by Mi
Sorry all. I'm on Thailand time and had to sleep.
The highway=traffic_calming key is found on the top level highway page
here: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:highway. On that page a link
to the types of traffic_calming device appears:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:traffic_calming.
On 2015-11-20 17:10, Rafael Avila Coya wrote :
> Hi:
>
> What happens when a traffic calming is a crossing for pedestrians at the
> same time? I have some examples in this avenue of my home town where I
> live: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1080908514
>
> I find it is more important to mark it
> On Nov 21, 2015, at 3:31 AM, Philip Barnes wrote:
>
> Most traffic calming features are not pedestrian crossings.
>
> Where traffic_calming is not a pedestrian crossing then
> highway=traffic_calming is the prefered way of tagging.
+1
If I read this discussion correctly,
We're stuck on two
Why is your display name different for what appears to be the exact same
email address? So bloody annoying
Don't you think you should have started this conversation *before*
making the edits?
Dave F.
On 20/11/2015 15:19, GerdP wrote:
Hi all,
I've noticed that a few (940) traffic_calmings
Georg Feddern-2 wrote
> If the highway=traffic_calming is obsolete in those cases -
> why isn't
>
>> A few nodes were tagged with crossing=*, in those cases I added the tag
>> highway=crossing (and kept the traffic_calming=* tag)
>
> highway=crossing obsolete in this cases?
I just wonder if you
ing.
What am I getting wrong here? Did someone remove the
preferred way of tagging from the wiki and nobody noticed
it for years?
Gerd
Von: Philip Barnes
Gesendet: Freitag, 20. November 2015 19:31
An: tagging@openstreetmap.org
Betreff: Re: [Tagging] imp
On 2015-11-20 16:33, Dave Swarthout wrote:
No. That change would not be okay.
AFAIK the correct tagging scenario is
highway=traffic_calming
traffic_calming=bump (or chicane, or other types as stated in the wiki
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:traffic_calming)
This is a hierarchical syst
On Fri, 2015-11-20 at 11:22 -0700, Tod Fitch wrote:
> A raised area several feet across with a marked crosswalk on top is
> not uncommon in Silicon Valley and more of them seem to appearing in
> residential areas. I suspect that it is one of the newer ways to
> address the combined issue of traffic
=island to the same node, but
>> I think that e.g. bumps are typically before the crossing,
>> so those should be tagged on a different node.
>>
>> Gerd
>>
>> ________
>> Von: Rafael Avila Coya
>> Gesendet: Freitag, 20
Re: [Tagging] improve tagging of traffic_calming
Am 20.11.2015 um 18:24 schrieb Gerd Petermann:
I found 940 nodes which were tagged with highway=traffic_calming.
Most of them were also tagged with e.g. traffic_calming=bump
or traffic_calming=table or one of the other well documented values.
A few we
Am 20.11.2015 um 18:24 schrieb Gerd Petermann:
I found 940 nodes which were tagged with highway=traffic_calming.
Most of them were also tagged with e.g. traffic_calming=bump
or traffic_calming=table or one of the other well documented values.
A few were not tagged traffic_calming=*.
I changed th
Am 20.11.2015 um 17:29 schrieb Marc Gemis:
On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 5:23 PM, Florian Lohoff wrote:
http://www.mapillary.com/map/im/LeaK3riwsMuv7f0i3Jt3XA/photo
I would tag the crossing as a node and the "table" as part of the way,
not as a node.
If it is really enforced to identify a traffic
On 20/11/15 16:47, Gerd Petermann wrote:
So you think that every node tagged traffic_calming=* should
additionally be tagged with highway=traffic_calming?
That would mean we have >99% traffic_calming nodes with
incorrect tagging.
I think you misunderstand OSM. Your assumption of incorrect
; Tag discussion, strategy and related tools
Betreff: Re: [Tagging] improve tagging of traffic_calming
I routinely use the combination of
highway=crossing
crossing=uncontrolled
traffic_calming=table or traffic_calming=hump
example:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1463764436
[http://www.openstreetma
at e.g. bumps are typically before the crossing,
>> so those should be tagged on a different node.
>>
>> Gerd
>>
>> ____
>> Von: Rafael Avila Coya
>> Gesendet: Freitag, 20. November 2015 17:10
>> An: tagging@ope
:33
An: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools
Betreff: Re: [Tagging] improve tagging of traffic_calming
No. That change would not be okay.
AFAIK the correct tagging scenario is
highway=traffic_calming
traffic_calming=bump (or chicane, or other types as stated in the wiki
h
those should be tagged on a different node.
>
> Gerd
>
>
> Von: Rafael Avila Coya
> Gesendet: Freitag, 20. November 2015 17:10
> An: tagging@openstreetmap.org
> Betreff: Re: [Tagging] improve tagging of traffic_calming
>
> Hi:
>
> What happ
On 20/11/15 15:19, GerdP wrote:
Hi all,
I've noticed that a few (940) traffic_calmings are mapped as
highway=traffic_calming , most of them also have the tag
traffic_calming=*, but ~ 10% did not.
The vast majority (> 212000) of the nodes tagged traffic_calming=* is not
also tagged highway=traff
No. That change would not be okay.
AFAIK the correct tagging scenario is
highway=traffic_calming
traffic_calming=bump (or chicane, or other types as stated in the wiki
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:traffic_calming)
This is a hierarchical system of tagging that works well in other
situat
those should be tagged on a different node.
Gerd
Von: Rafael Avila Coya
Gesendet: Freitag, 20. November 2015 17:10
An: tagging@openstreetmap.org
Betreff: Re: [Tagging] improve tagging of traffic_calming
Hi:
What happens when a traffic calming is a crossin
On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 5:23 PM, Florian Lohoff wrote:
> http://www.mapillary.com/map/im/LeaK3riwsMuv7f0i3Jt3XA/photo
I would tag the crossing as a node and the "table" as part of the way,
not as a node.
but a combination of highway=crossing; traffic_calming=table on a node
could work as well.
On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 08:19:56AM -0700, GerdP wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> So I started to cleanup, found a few nodes which where highway=crossing
> instead of traffic_calming, found a few nodes not (yet) connected to roads
> and finally decided to do a few larger changes today.
http://www.mapillary.co
Hi:
What happens when a traffic calming is a crossing for pedestrians at the
same time? I have some examples in this avenue of my home town where I
live: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1080908514
I find it is more important to mark it as a highway=crossing than a
highway=traffic_calming
Chee
Hi all,
I've noticed that a few (940) traffic_calmings are mapped as
highway=traffic_calming , most of them also have the tag
traffic_calming=*, but ~ 10% did not.
The vast majority (> 212000) of the nodes tagged traffic_calming=* is not
also tagged highway=traffic_calming. I looked at the wiki
47 matches
Mail list logo