Re: [Tagging] Highway proposed/planned distinction
Ran into this issue today. They are constructing a new trunk road in an area I’m mapping, an as is usual for Japan, they build the road in stages, completing one stage before they go to the next. I know, down to about 20m, the alignment of the sections to be built - so do I mark the whole road as construction=, or do I leave the section which hasn’t had the ground broken yet as “planned”? even though the road as a whole is under construction and will be built? Section under construction (official Govt docs) http://www.pref.chiba.lg.jp/kitachi-do/documents/panf-3.pdf http://www.pref.chiba.lg.jp/kitachi-do/documents/panf-3.pdf http://www.pref.chiba.lg.jp/kitachi-do/documents/panf-4.pdf http://www.pref.chiba.lg.jp/kitachi-do/documents/panf-4.pdf Half under construction, Right half not started yet. Javbw On Jul 15, 2015, at 5:53 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: sent from a phone Am 15.07.2015 um 00:51 schrieb moltonel molto...@gmail.com: On 14 July 2015 19:57:30 GMT+01:00, jonat...@bigfatfrog67.me wrote: Linguistically I would say proposed comes before planned. Planning your wedding is not the same as proposing marriage! +1 when you're planning to marry someone it might be much farther away then when you already propose wedding locations ;-) I agree generally though, planned seems more advanced than proposed. Cheers Martin ___ 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] Highway proposed/planned distinction
On 16/07/2015, jonat...@bigfatfrog67.me jonat...@bigfatfrog67.me wrote: I would say it depends if the untouched land is still in its original use or not. If it is then mark it as planned, if it’s cordoned off waiting for the construction to get there then I would mark it as under construction. Agreed. My understanding from johnw's mail was that the other sections were not even cordoned-off yet. In my experience (Ireland/France), this is the usual way that road builders do things. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Highway proposed/planned distinction
I would say it depends if the untouched land is still in its original use or not. If it is then mark it as planned, if it’s cordoned off waiting for the construction to get there then I would mark it as under construction. Jonathan http://bigfatfrog67.me From: johnw Sent: Thursday, 16 July 2015 11:17 To: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools Ran into this issue today. They are constructing a new trunk road in an area I’m mapping, an as is usual for Japan, they build the road in stages, completing one stage before they go to the next. I know, down to about 20m, the alignment of the sections to be built - so do I mark the whole road as construction=, or do I leave the section which hasn’t had the ground broken yet as “planned”? even though the road as a whole is under construction and will be built? Section under construction (official Govt docs) http://www.pref.chiba.lg.jp/kitachi-do/documents/panf-3.pdf http://www.pref.chiba.lg.jp/kitachi-do/documents/panf-4.pdf Half under construction, Right half not started yet. Javbw On Jul 15, 2015, at 5:53 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: sent from a phone Am 15.07.2015 um 00:51 schrieb moltonel molto...@gmail.com: On 14 July 2015 19:57:30 GMT+01:00, jonat...@bigfatfrog67.me wrote: Linguistically I would say proposed comes before planned. Planning your wedding is not the same as proposing marriage! +1 when you're planning to marry someone it might be much farther away then when you already propose wedding locations ;-) I agree generally though, planned seems more advanced than proposed. Cheers Martin ___ 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] Highway proposed/planned distinction
sent from a phone Am 15.07.2015 um 00:51 schrieb moltonel molto...@gmail.com: On 14 July 2015 19:57:30 GMT+01:00, jonat...@bigfatfrog67.me wrote: Linguistically I would say proposed comes before planned. Planning your wedding is not the same as proposing marriage! +1 when you're planning to marry someone it might be much farther away then when you already propose wedding locations ;-) I agree generally though, planned seems more advanced than proposed. Cheers Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Highway proposed/planned distinction
sent from a phone Am 14.07.2015 um 20:57 schrieb jonat...@bigfatfrog67.me jonat...@bigfatfrog67.me: but planned routes are ones that have passed the usual planning discussions and are awaiting construction, which can sometimes be many months or years, but will happen, short of a political change of heart. typically these plans get modified during the process (sometimes during construction), and these modifications can be anything significant like alternative route, bigger, smaller, not built at all etc. The process sometimes takes decades, so it is also natural that these modifications occur and sometimes are drastic cheers Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Highway proposed/planned distinction
Sent from my iPhone On Jul 15, 2015, at 3:05 AM, Andy Townsend ajt1...@gmail.com wrote: Some of the proposed highways* are clearly just flights of fancy with no timescale or money behind them. Yea, thats true - There are some freeways in California that have been proposed for 50 years! California has a plan for their freeways (with money behind it) out to about 2030 or so (maybe to 2050, i think) - and those old ones still are not on the list to be built. Tokyo has the ring tollways being built now (actual construction) with the last pieces of some rings linking smaller roads in the planning stages (planned to be built, but exact routing is unsure), set for completion by 2020 or so. Ill have to move those pieces from proposed to planned, as they are actually planned. But poor 125 in California will have to stay as proposed Javbw ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Highway proposed/planned distinction
On 14 July 2015 19:57:30 GMT+01:00, jonat...@bigfatfrog67.me wrote: Linguistically I would say proposed comes before planned. Planning your wedding is not the same as proposing marriage! +1 Personally I don't think we should routinely display proposed routes, because they may never come to reality, but planned routes are ones that have passed the usual planning discussions and are awaiting construction, which can sometimes be many months or years, but will happen, short of a political change of heart. I think there's a fairly objective criteria that can be used to distinguish 'planed' from 'proposed' : if the financing has been completed (money has been set aside in the budgets and will not be used for something else), then it fits the osm definition of planned. There was some amount of tagging for the renderer shortly after the railway rendering changes, but it didn't last long (that i could see) and we now have better, more finegrained data. The same would hopefully happen with planned/proposed, especially with a clear criteria and less historical confusion. -- Vincent Dp ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Highway proposed/planned distinction
Linguistically I would say proposed comes before planned. Planning your wedding is not the same as proposing marriage! Personally I don't think we should routinely display proposed routes, because they may never come to reality, but planned routes are ones that have passed the usual planning discussions and are awaiting construction, which can sometimes be many months or years, but will happen, short of a political change of heart. Jonathan http://bigfatfrog67.me From: Volker Schmidt Sent: Tuesday, 14 July 2015 18:38 To: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools This is a question of language. The OSM life cycle discussion http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Lifecycle_prefix lists planned as duplicate of proposed. I would agree with that. As a map user I always like maps that look ahead and show planned roadways, not only those where you can already see the construction work going on. This has the added value when you plan a trip, that you would be alerted to possible problems (in case the local mappers missed the transition from planned to construction). I would tend to suggest that we keep the Proposed and Under Construction objects visualised with different representation. Volker (Italy) On 14 July 2015 at 19:23, Daniel Koć daniel@koć.pl wrote: Hi, We're about to abandon rendering highway=proposed in the osm-carto (default OSM map style), but we think it's still good to show those which are closer to be really constructed: https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/1654 Is highway=planned a good choice to be rendered instead or some other tagging scheme would be better? -- The train is always on time / The trick is to be ready to put your bags down [A. Cohen] ___ 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] Highway proposed/planned distinction
On 14/07/2015 18:23, Daniel Koć wrote: Hi, We're about to abandon rendering highway=proposed in the osm-carto (default OSM map style), but we think it's still good to show those which are closer to be really constructed: https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/1654 Is highway=planned a good choice to be rendered instead or some other tagging scheme would be better? If you're going to decide to not render highway=proposed then just make that decision - if you render planned instead, people who want their pet schemes to be rendered will just change proposed to planned and carry on as before, just as when abandoned railways somehow magically became disused when abandoned was no longer rendered. Some of the proposed highways* are clearly just flights of fancy with no timescale or money behind them. Unlike with abandoned railways, there's no dirty great scar on the ground to see, so they're not easily verifiably either. Cheers, Andy * like http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/290450974/history ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Highway proposed/planned distinction
This is a question of language. The OSM life cycle discussion http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Lifecycle_prefix lists planned as duplicate of proposed. I would agree with that. As a map user I always like maps that look ahead and show planned roadways, not only those where you can already see the construction work going on. This has the added value when you plan a trip, that you would be alerted to possible problems (in case the local mappers missed the transition from planned to construction). I would tend to suggest that we keep the Proposed and Under Construction objects visualised with different representation. Volker (Italy) On 14 July 2015 at 19:23, Daniel Koć daniel@koć.pl wrote: Hi, We're about to abandon rendering highway=proposed in the osm-carto (default OSM map style), but we think it's still good to show those which are closer to be really constructed: https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/1654 Is highway=planned a good choice to be rendered instead or some other tagging scheme would be better? -- The train is always on time / The trick is to be ready to put your bags down [A. Cohen] ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
