Re: [Talk-ca] Trans-Canada Highway research

[Olivia Robu - (p)]

Hello everyone,

As we promised, we came with an updated regarding the relations status for 
Trans-Canada Highway. Until now we managed to resolve the broken relations from 
Alberta, British Columbia and Manitoba (5 broken relations fixed).  You can see 
in the wiki page all the updates that we have made 
(https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Canada/Trans-Canada_Highway ).

Also, in the near future  we intend to resolve the rest of the broken 
relations.  At the end of this task  we will update the super relation (ID 
1307243) with information about geometry and new tags (as we discussed in the  
previous emails).

If anyone wants to fix the other broken relations are welcome to help.

We will come back with un update for the rest of the broken relations.

Regards,
Olivia

From: Olivia Robu - (p)
Sent: 27 aprilie 2018 12:37
To: 'talk-ca@openstreetmap.org' 
mailto:talk-ca@openstreetmap.org>>
Subject: RE: [Talk-ca] Trans-Canada Highway research

Hello,
  Regarding our proposal for Trans-Canada Highway, we came with the Wiki page 
on OSM, as we promised, where we listed all the relations that  make up the 
Trans-Canada Highway. Also, we inserted a status column where all of you can 
see the situation of every relation, whether it is broken or not. Here is the 
link to the Wiki page: 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Canada/Trans-Canada_Highway .  
Also, we want to ask you if any of you are willing to help us fix the broken 
relations and keep the wiki page updated with the current status? After we 
collect some feedback from you, we want to get involved in correcting the 
broken relations and we will send you an update of our progress.
   As we have discussed in the other mails, we want to update Trans-Canada 
Highway (ID 1307243). This will not affect the currently existing routes, but 
it will have the same geometry and the following tags:
   type=route
  route=road
   name=Trans-Canada Highway
   name:fr=Route Transcanadienne - we propose 
this new tag for the route name (as we seen that is used only for the way) due 
to the Francophone provinces through which this new route passes.


Regards,
Olivia

From: Olivia Robu - (p)
Sent: 29 martie 2018 09:42
To: 'talk-ca@openstreetmap.org' 
mailto:talk-ca@openstreetmap.org>>
Subject: RE: [Talk-ca] Trans-Canada Highway research

Hello,

Thank you for your feedback, it has been very helpful. In relation to that we 
come with another proposal: to update the super relation 
(https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1307243)  from the east to west of 
Canada, that includes all the routes and has the folowing tags:
type=route
route=road
   name=Trans-Canada Highway
name:fr=Route Transcanadienne - we propose this new tag for the route name (as 
we seen that is used only for the way) due to the Francophone provinces through 
which this new route passes

Regarding the way name tag and the ref we won't make any changes. Also, for the 
route type (motorway, trunk, primary, secondary, teriary) we will ask for your 
advice for specific cases.

For the broken relations of Trans-Canada Highway we will create a wiki page on 
OSM where we will describe each route and put a status of the relation and a 
comment box for all the members from our community to see and maybe help us to 
fix this problem.

We will come back with un update for the wiki page.

Regards,
Olivia Robu

___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] Trans-Canada Highway research

[Olivia Robu - (p)]

Hi Matthew,

Thank you very much for your feedback.
Regarding the way to identify the broken relations, we are using the OSM 
Relation Analyzer that shows us exactly where the missing members of the 
relation are. You can access this link:  http://ra.osmsurround.org/index  and 
insert the relation ID, and after that you can see on the map the broken area, 
and also you can download the area in you editor (JOSM or Potlatch). I think 
this the easiest way to identify the broken relations and to repair them.
Regarding the other problem, if Highway 17A is part, or not of the Trans-Canada 
Highway, I want to ask if  someone in our community has a reliable source of 
this issue to share it with us.

Regards,
Olivia

From: Matthew Darwin <matt...@mdarwin.ca>
Sent: 27 aprilie 2018 18:54
To: talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] Trans-Canada Highway research


Hi Olivia,

I spent some fixing tags on TCH ways in Ontario in the last few weeks.  Do an 
overpass query on nat_name=Trans-Canada Highway in Ontario (see below).

Is it possible to build a query that shows ways with nat_name=Trans-Canada 
Highway and not part of the relation, and vice-versa.  It would make the task 
of fixing the routes easier.  Also if the query was built into OSMOSE or 
another error checker then we can have some hope it is less likely to get out 
of sync in the future.

Also it is not clear if Highway 17A is part of the TCH or not.  Wikipedia says 
yes, comments in OSM say it is not.  Some research is needed here I guess.

I am willing to help in Ontario.



[out:xml][timeout:100];

{{geocodeArea:Ontario}}->.searchArea;

(

way["nat_name"](area.searchArea);

);

(._;>;);

out meta;


On 2018-04-27 05:37 AM, Olivia Robu - (p) wrote:
Hello,
  Regarding our proposal for Trans-Canada Highway, we came with the Wiki page 
on OSM, as we promised, where we listed all the relations that  make up the 
Trans-Canada Highway. Also, we inserted a status column where all of you can 
see the situation of every relation, whether it is broken or not. Here is the 
link to the Wiki page: 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Canada/Trans-Canada_Highway .  
Also, we want to ask you if any of you are willing to help us fix the broken 
relations and keep the wiki page updated with the current status? After we 
collect some feedback from you, we want to get involved in correcting the 
broken relations and we will send you an update of our progress.
   As we have discussed in the other mails, we want to update Trans-Canada 
Highway (ID 1307243). This will not affect the currently existing routes, but 
it will have the same geometry and the following tags:
   type=route
  route=road
   name=Trans-Canada Highway
   name:fr=Route Transcanadienne - we propose 
this new tag for the route name (as we seen that is used only for the way) due 
to the Francophone provinces through which this new route passes.


Regards,
Olivia

From: Olivia Robu - (p)
Sent: 29 martie 2018 09:42
To: 'talk-ca@openstreetmap.org<mailto:talk-ca@openstreetmap.org>' 
<talk-ca@openstreetmap.org><mailto:talk-ca@openstreetmap.org>
Subject: RE: [Talk-ca] Trans-Canada Highway research

Hello,

Thank you for your feedback, it has been very helpful. In relation to that we 
come with another proposal: to update the super relation 
(https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1307243)  from the east to west of 
Canada, that includes all the routes and has the folowing tags:
type=route
route=road
   name=Trans-Canada Highway
name:fr=Route Transcanadienne - we propose this new tag for the route name (as 
we seen that is used only for the way) due to the Francophone provinces through 
which this new route passes

Regarding the way name tag and the ref we won't make any changes. Also, for the 
route type (motorway, trunk, primary, secondary, teriary) we will ask for your 
advice for specific cases.

For the broken relations of Trans-Canada Highway we will create a wiki page on 
OSM where we will describe each route and put a status of the relation and a 
comment box for all the members from our community to see and maybe help us to 
fix this problem.

We will come back with un update for the wiki page.

Regards,
Olivia Robu





___

Talk-ca mailing list

Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org<mailto:Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org>

https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] Trans-Canada Highway research

[Matthew Darwin]

Hi Olivia,

I spent some fixing tags on TCH ways in *Ontario* in the last few 
weeks.  Do an overpass query on nat_name=Trans-Canada Highway in 
Ontario (see below).


Is it possible to build a query that shows ways with 
nat_name=Trans-Canada Highway and not part of the relation, and 
vice-versa.  It would make the task of fixing the routes easier.  Also 
if the query was built into OSMOSE or another error checker then we 
can have some hope it is less likely to get out of sync in the future.


Also it is not clear if Highway 17A is part of the TCH or not.  
Wikipedia says yes, comments in OSM say it is not.  Some research is 
needed here I guess.


I am willing to help in Ontario.

[out:xml][timeout:100];
{{geocodeArea:Ontario}}->.searchArea;
(
way["nat_name"](area.searchArea);
);
(._;>;);
out meta;

On 2018-04-27 05:37 AM, Olivia Robu - (p) wrote:


Hello,

  Regarding our proposal for Trans-Canada Highway, we came with the 
Wiki page on OSM, as we promised, where we listed all the relations 
that  make up the Trans-Canada Highway. Also, we inserted a status 
column where all of you can see the situation of every relation, 
whether it is broken or not. Here is the link to the Wiki page: 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Canada/Trans-Canada_Highway. 
*Also, we want to ask you if any of you are willing to help us fix 
the broken relations and keep the wiki page updated with the current 
status?* *After we collect some feedback from you, we want to get 
involved in correcting the broken relations and we will send you an 
update of our progress. *


As we have discussed in the other mails, we want to update 
Trans-Canada Highway (ID 1307243). This will not affect the 
currently existing routes, but it will have the same geometry and 
the following tags:


   type=route

route=road

name=Trans-Canada Highway

 name:fr=Route Transcanadienne - we propose this new tag 
for the route name (as we seen that is used only for the way) due to 
the Francophone provinces through which this new route passes.


Regards,

Olivia

*From:* Olivia Robu - (p)
*Sent:* 29 martie 2018 09:42
*To:* 'talk-ca@openstreetmap.org' <talk-ca@openstreetmap.org>
*Subject:* RE: [Talk-ca] Trans-Canada Highway research

Hello,

Thank you for your feedback, it has been very helpful. In relation 
to that we come with another proposal: to update the super relation 
(https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1307243)  from the east to 
west of Canada, that includes all the routes and has the folowing tags:


type=route

route=road

   name=Trans-Canada Highway

name:fr=Route Transcanadienne - we propose this new tag for the 
route name (as we seen that is used only for the way) due to the 
Francophone provinces through which this new route passes


Regarding the way name tag and the ref we won't make any changes. 
Also, for the route type (motorway, trunk, primary, secondary, 
teriary) we will ask for your advice for specific cases.


For the broken relations of Trans-Canada Highway we will create a 
wiki page on OSM where we will describe each route and put a status 
of the relation and a comment box for all the members from our 
community to see and maybe help us to fix this problem.


We will come back with un update for the wiki page.

Regards,

Olivia Robu



___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca


___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] Trans-Canada Highway research

[Olivia Robu - (p)]

Hello,
  Regarding our proposal for Trans-Canada Highway, we came with the Wiki page 
on OSM, as we promised, where we listed all the relations that  make up the 
Trans-Canada Highway. Also, we inserted a status column where all of you can 
see the situation of every relation, whether it is broken or not. Here is the 
link to the Wiki page: 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Canada/Trans-Canada_Highway .  
Also, we want to ask you if any of you are willing to help us fix the broken 
relations and keep the wiki page updated with the current status? After we 
collect some feedback from you, we want to get involved in correcting the 
broken relations and we will send you an update of our progress.
   As we have discussed in the other mails, we want to update Trans-Canada 
Highway (ID 1307243). This will not affect the currently existing routes, but 
it will have the same geometry and the following tags:
   type=route
  route=road
   name=Trans-Canada Highway
   name:fr=Route Transcanadienne - we propose 
this new tag for the route name (as we seen that is used only for the way) due 
to the Francophone provinces through which this new route passes.


Regards,
Olivia

From: Olivia Robu - (p)
Sent: 29 martie 2018 09:42
To: 'talk-ca@openstreetmap.org' <talk-ca@openstreetmap.org>
Subject: RE: [Talk-ca] Trans-Canada Highway research

Hello,

Thank you for your feedback, it has been very helpful. In relation to that we 
come with another proposal: to update the super relation 
(https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1307243)  from the east to west of 
Canada, that includes all the routes and has the folowing tags:
type=route
route=road
   name=Trans-Canada Highway
name:fr=Route Transcanadienne - we propose this new tag for the route name (as 
we seen that is used only for the way) due to the Francophone provinces through 
which this new route passes

Regarding the way name tag and the ref we won't make any changes. Also, for the 
route type (motorway, trunk, primary, secondary, teriary) we will ask for your 
advice for specific cases.

For the broken relations of Trans-Canada Highway we will create a wiki page on 
OSM where we will describe each route and put a status of the relation and a 
comment box for all the members from our community to see and maybe help us to 
fix this problem.

We will come back with un update for the wiki page.

Regards,
Olivia Robu

___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] Trans-Canada Highway research

[Olivia Robu - (p)]

Hello,

Thank you for your feedback, it has been very helpful. In relation to that we 
come with another proposal: to update the super relation 
(https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1307243)  from the east to west of 
Canada, that includes all the routes and has the folowing tags:
type=route
route=road
   name=Trans-Canada Highway
name:fr=Route Transcanadienne - we propose this new tag for the route name (as 
we seen that is used only for the way) due to the Francophone provinces through 
which this new route passes

Regarding the way name tag and the ref we won't make any changes. Also, for the 
route type (motorway, trunk, primary, secondary, teriary) we will ask for your 
advice for specific cases.

For the broken relations of Trans-Canada Highway we will create a wiki page on 
OSM where we will describe each route and put a status of the relation and a 
comment box for all the members from our community to see and maybe help us to 
fix this problem.

We will come back with un update for the wiki page.

Regards,
Olivia Robu

___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] Trans-Canada Highway research

[Pierre Béland]

Martijn
Si je comprends bien ton message, tu proposes que la communauté canadienne 
accepte de réaliser les projets de Telenav, sinon, votre équipe prendra le 
contrôle ?  À mon avis, cette proposition ignore le rôle des communautés 
locales dans le projet OSM, et le réduit à celui d'exécutants.

Les commentaires des contributeurs canadiens allaient tous dans le même sens. 
Nous ne comprenons pas ce que vous visez exactement. Si une simple relation 
Transcanadienne répond à vos besoins, je penses que vous pouvez le réaliser 
facilement. 
Par contre, les contributeurs canadiens ont exprimé leur désaccord à ce que 
vous modifiez systématiquement les routes pour normaliser les noms selon les 
besoins de votre équipe. 
Pierre 
 

Le mercredi 28 mars 2018 15 h 43 min 31 s HAE, Martijn van Exel 
 a écrit :  
 
 Pierre, 

Consistency in the data is the main goal. This benefits all the things you 
mention, including map rendering and parsing by navigation software such as 
ours but also OSMAnd, maps.me and others.
There is a master relation for the Trans-Canada Highway / Route 
Transcanadienne[0] but it is incomplete and broken. One idea would be to repair 
it, and the province-level relations that would be the members of it. Would you 
be interested in coordinating that?

[0] https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1307243
--
  Martijn van Exel
  m...@rtijn.org
  ___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] Trans-Canada Highway research

[Martijn van Exel]

Pierre, 

Consistency in the data is the main goal. This benefits all the things
you mention, including map rendering and parsing by navigation software
such as ours but also OSMAnd, maps.me and others.There is a master relation for 
the Trans-Canada Highway / Route
Transcanadienne[0] but it is incomplete and broken. One idea would be to
repair it, and the province-level relations that would be the members of
it. Would you be interested in coordinating that?
[0] https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1307243
--
  Martijn van Exel
  m...@rtijn.org



On Wed, Mar 28, 2018, at 13:24, Pierre Béland wrote:
> Bonjour Martin,
> 
> Il me semble que les divers commentaires ont été assez clair. La
> communauté OSM du Canada est assez mature pour gérer cela et n'avons
> pas besoin que Navteq démarre un projet pour modifier ces données.> 
> L'équipe Navteq a déja créé beaucoup de problèmes en ajoutant partout
> des relations complexes pour un simple interdit de faire un virage en
> U.  Quels sont maintenant les objectifs de la tâche> 
> More Overlapping Ways in Canada
> Telenav OSM Integrity Checks's Project
> 
> 
> A mon  avis, vous devez discuter avec la communauté canadienne avant
> de démarrer de tels projets. Svp interrompre cette tâche et venez en
> discuter.> 
> Et quels sont vos objectifs pour les modifications vs la route
> Trancanadienne? Un meilleur rendu sur la carte, des itinéraires dans
> les outils de navigation ? Pourquoi ne pas simplement créer une
> relation de type route pour la route Transcanadienne?> 
> ** 
> Pierre **
> 
> 
> Le mercredi 28 mars 2018 13 h 23 min 37 s HAE, Martijn van Exel
> <m...@rtijn.org> a écrit :> 
> 
> Hi all, 
> 
> My colleague Olivia will respond more in depth with some suggestions
> based on your feedback. Thanks for giving our team's ideas some
> thought.> 
> In the meantime, as I was writing a post about the new version of
> MapRoulette, I thought I'd make a Challenge for misspelled Trans-
> Canada Highway names. Please find it here:
> http://maproulette.org/mr3/browse/challenges/2955 . There's only a
> little over 200 tasks, so that should be an easy thing to fix
> together.> 
> The Challenge is based on this Overpass query:
> http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/xoW -- it's pretty easy to make your own
> Challenges based on your own Overpass queries or GeoJSON files.> 
> The diary post explaining MapRoulette is here:
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/mvexel/diary/43596> 
> Thanks,
> --
>   Martijn van Exel
>   m...@rtijn.org
> 
> 
> 
> On Tue, Mar 27, 2018, at 07:13, Begin Daniel wrote:
>> Andrew, Je ne crois pas que le fait que ces ‘contributeurs’ soient
>> Roumains, Javanais ou Américains soit à considérer. Ils nous ont
>> consultés avant de faire la modification et c’est parfait. Cependant,
>> je suis entièrement en accord avec ta réponse - laissez ça à la
>> communauté canadienne!>>  


>> (I do not believe that the fact these ‘contributors’ are Romanians,
>> Javanese or Americans is to be considered. They consulted us before
>> making the change and it's perfect. However, I fully agree with your
>> answer - leave that to the Canadian community!-)>>  


>> Sent from  Mail[1] for Windows 10


>>  


>> 
>> *From:* Andrew Lester <a-les...@shaw.ca> *Sent:* Monday, March 26,
>> 2018 1:35:56 PM *To:* Olivia Robu - (p) *Cc:* talk-ca *Subject:* Re:
>> [Talk-ca] Trans-Canada Highway research>>  
>> While standardization may be nice, it often won't be possible even
>> within a single country. As has already been discussed, there are
>> differing conventions in different provinces, so please don't try to
>> apply a single plan to all provinces. How the TCH is handled in OSM
>> will vary depending on the province.>> 
>> For example, in BC (and some other western provinces), the TCH
>> carries the 1 ref. In some places where other ref'ed highways
>> coincide with the TCH, the ref is recorded as "ref=1;19", for
>> example. There are places within cities where the TCH runs on city
>> roads with different names (e.g. Douglas Street in Victoria), so
>> those ways are named with the local name and the TCH name is recorded
>> in the alt_name or nat_name tag (a separate argument is which one of
>> these to use). An alternate name should never be added to the primary
>> name in brackets like proposed. That's exactly what the alt_name (and
>> similar) tags are for. There are also many places where Trans-Canada
>> Highway is the official local name of the road, like most of the
>> highway in BC.>> 
>> As for the correct spelling of the TCH, I think it would be fairly
>&

Re: [Talk-ca] Trans-Canada Highway research

[Pierre Béland]

Bonjour Martin,
Il me semble que les divers commentaires ont été assez clair. La communauté OSM 
du Canada est assez mature pour gérer cela et n'avons pas besoin que Navteq 
démarre un projet pour modifier ces données.
L'équipe Navteq a déja créé beaucoup de problèmes en ajoutant partout des 
relations complexes pour un simple interdit de faire un virage en U.  Quels 
sont maintenant les objectifs de la tâche
 More Overlapping Ways in CanadaTelenav OSM Integrity Checks's Project
A mon  avis, vous devez discuter avec la communauté canadienne avant de 
démarrer de tels projets. Svp interrompre cette tâche et venez en discuter.

Et quels sont vos objectifs pour les modifications vs la route Trancanadienne? 
Un meilleur rendu sur la carte, des itinéraires dans les outils de navigation ? 
Pourquoi ne pas simplement créer une relation de type route pour la route 
Transcanadienne?

 
Pierre 
 

Le mercredi 28 mars 2018 13 h 23 min 37 s HAE, Martijn van Exel 
<m...@rtijn.org> a écrit :  
 
 Hi all, 

My colleague Olivia will respond more in depth with some suggestions based on 
your feedback. Thanks for giving our team's ideas some thought.

In the meantime, as I was writing a post about the new version of MapRoulette, 
I thought I'd make a Challenge for misspelled Trans-Canada Highway names. 
Please find it here: http://maproulette.org/mr3/browse/challenges/2955 . 
There's only a little over 200 tasks, so that should be an easy thing to fix 
together. 

The Challenge is based on this Overpass query: http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/xoW 
-- it's pretty easy to make your own Challenges based on your own Overpass 
queries or GeoJSON files.

The diary post explaining MapRoulette is here: 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/mvexel/diary/43596

Thanks,--
  Martijn van Exel
  m...@rtijn.org



On Tue, Mar 27, 2018, at 07:13, Begin Daniel wrote:


Andrew, Je ne crois pas que le fait que ces ‘contributeurs’ soient Roumains, 
Javanais ou Américains soit à considérer. Ils nous ont consultés avant de faire 
la modification et c’est parfait. Cependant, je suis entièrement en accord avec 
ta réponse - laissez ça à la communauté canadienne!


 


(I do not believe that the fact these ‘contributors’ are Romanians, Javanese or 
Americans is to be considered. They consulted us before making the change and 
it's perfect. However, I fully agree with your answer - leave that to the 
Canadian community!-)


 


Sent from  Mail for Windows 10


 


From: Andrew Lester <a-les...@shaw.ca>
 Sent: Monday, March 26, 2018 1:35:56 PM
 To: Olivia Robu - (p)
 Cc: talk-ca
 Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] Trans-Canada Highway research  
While standardization may be nice, it often won't be possible even within a 
single country. As has already been discussed, there are differing conventions 
in different provinces, so please don't try to apply a single plan to all 
provinces. How the TCH is handled in OSM will vary depending on the province.

For example, in BC (and some other western provinces), the TCH carries the 1 
ref. In some places where other ref'ed highways coincide with the TCH, the ref 
is recorded as "ref=1;19", for example. There are places within cities where 
the TCH runs on city roads with different names (e.g. Douglas Street in 
Victoria), so those ways are named with the local name and the TCH name is 
recorded in the alt_name or nat_name tag (a separate argument is which one of 
these to use). An alternate name should never be added to the primary name in 
brackets like proposed. That's exactly what the alt_name (and similar) tags are 
for. There are also many places where Trans-Canada Highway is the official 
local name of the road, like most of the highway in BC.

As for the correct spelling of the TCH, I think it would be fairly 
uncontroversial to standardize the name to "Trans-Canada Highway" or "Route 
Transcanadienne" where it's appropriate to use the TCH name, because those are 
the official spellings. Any variants can be considered errors.

As for varying highway classifications, this is correct and to be expected. 
Unlike the US interstate system, the Trans-Canada Highway network varies in 
construction and importance all across the country, so the classification can't 
be standardized to just motorway or trunk. There are sections where primary is 
the most appropriate, and possibly even secondary in some places. Just on 
Vancouver Island alone, the roads designated as the TCH vary from a six-lane 
motorway all the way down to a two-lane effectively-tertiary road.

Since there will need to be a lot of local knowledge required for such a 
project, I strongly recommend that this project not be undertaken by Telenav. 
This is the kind of work that Canadians should be doing, being the most 
familiar with the on-the-ground situation which will dictate how the highway is 
handled in each province. The numerous past issues with Telenav's contributions 
is also a factor that can't be ign

Re: [Talk-ca] Trans-Canada Highway research

[Martijn van Exel]

Hi all, 

My colleague Olivia will respond more in depth with some suggestions
based on your feedback. Thanks for giving our team's ideas some thought.
In the meantime, as I was writing a post about the new version of
MapRoulette, I thought I'd make a Challenge for misspelled Trans-Canada
Highway names. Please find it here:
http://maproulette.org/mr3/browse/challenges/2955 . There's only a
little over 200 tasks, so that should be an easy thing to fix together.
The Challenge is based on this Overpass query:
http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/xoW -- it's pretty easy to make your own
Challenges based on your own Overpass queries or GeoJSON files.
The diary post explaining MapRoulette is here:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/mvexel/diary/43596
Thanks,
--
  Martijn van Exel
  m...@rtijn.org



On Tue, Mar 27, 2018, at 07:13, Begin Daniel wrote:
> Andrew, Je ne crois pas que le fait que ces ‘contributeurs’ soient
> Roumains, Javanais ou Américains soit à considérer. Ils nous ont
> consultés avant de faire la modification et c’est parfait. Cependant,
> je suis entièrement en accord avec ta réponse - laissez ça à la
> communauté canadienne!>  


> (I do not believe that the fact these ‘contributors’ are Romanians,
> Javanese or Americans is to be considered. They consulted us before
> making the change and it's perfect. However, I fully agree with your
> answer - leave that to the Canadian community!-)>  


> Sent from  Mail[1] for Windows 10


>  


> 
> *From:* Andrew Lester <a-les...@shaw.ca> *Sent:* Monday, March 26,
> 2018 1:35:56 PM *To:* Olivia Robu - (p) *Cc:* talk-ca *Subject:* Re:
> [Talk-ca] Trans-Canada Highway research>  
> While standardization may be nice, it often won't be possible even
> within a single country. As has already been discussed, there are
> differing conventions in different provinces, so please don't try to
> apply a single plan to all provinces. How the TCH is handled in OSM
> will vary depending on the province.> 
> For example, in BC (and some other western provinces), the TCH carries
> the 1 ref. In some places where other ref'ed highways coincide with
> the TCH, the ref is recorded as "ref=1;19", for example. There are
> places within cities where the TCH runs on city roads with different
> names (e.g. Douglas Street in Victoria), so those ways are named with
> the local name and the TCH name is recorded in the alt_name or
> nat_name tag (a separate argument is which one of these to use). An
> alternate name should never be added to the primary name in brackets
> like proposed. That's exactly what the alt_name (and similar) tags are
> for. There are also many places where Trans-Canada Highway is the
> official local name of the road, like most of the highway in BC.> 
> As for the correct spelling of the TCH, I think it would be fairly
> uncontroversial to standardize the name to "Trans-Canada Highway" or
> "Route Transcanadienne" where it's appropriate to use the TCH name,
> because those are the official spellings. Any variants can be
> considered errors.> 
> As for varying highway classifications, this is correct and to be
> expected. Unlike the US interstate system, the Trans-Canada Highway
> network varies in construction and importance all across the country,
> so the classification can't be standardized to just motorway or trunk.
> There are sections where primary is the most appropriate, and possibly
> even secondary in some places. Just on Vancouver Island alone, the
> roads designated as the TCH vary from a six-lane motorway all the way
> down to a two-lane effectively-tertiary road.> 
> Since there will need to be a lot of local knowledge required for such
> a project, I strongly recommend that this project not be undertaken by
> Telenav. This is the kind of work that Canadians should be doing,
> being the most familiar with the on-the-ground situation which will
> dictate how the highway is handled in each province. The numerous past
> issues with Telenav's contributions is also a factor that can't be
> ignored. Does it really make sense for a team of Romanians with a
> history of questionable decisions to be making sweeping changes to the
> Canadian national highway network? At least they've brought a proposal
> to the community this time rather than just push forward with a faulty
> plan like they have in the past. I'm still cleaning up after previous
> Telenav projects in my area that added countless non-existent turn
> restrictions and names and also removed valid data.> 
> Andrew
> Victoria, BC, Canada
> 
> 
> *From: *"Olivia Robu - (p)" <olivia.r...@telenav.com>
> *To: *"talk-ca" <talk-ca@openstreetmap.org>
> *Sent: *Monday, March 26, 2018 4:20:16 AM
> *Subject: *[Talk-ca] T

Re: [Talk-ca] Trans-Canada Highway research

[Begin Daniel]

Andrew, Je ne crois pas que le fait que ces ‘contributeurs’ soient Roumains, 
Javanais ou Américains soit à considérer. Ils nous ont consultés avant de faire 
la modification et c’est parfait. Cependant, je suis entièrement en accord avec 
ta réponse - laissez ça à la communauté canadienne!

(I do not believe that the fact these ‘contributors’ are Romanians, Javanese or 
Americans is to be considered. They consulted us before making the change and 
it's perfect. However, I fully agree with your answer - leave that to the 
Canadian community!-)

Sent from Mail<https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for Windows 10


From: Andrew Lester <a-les...@shaw.ca>
Sent: Monday, March 26, 2018 1:35:56 PM
To: Olivia Robu - (p)
Cc: talk-ca
Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] Trans-Canada Highway research

While standardization may be nice, it often won't be possible even within a 
single country. As has already been discussed, there are differing conventions 
in different provinces, so please don't try to apply a single plan to all 
provinces. How the TCH is handled in OSM will vary depending on the province.

For example, in BC (and some other western provinces), the TCH carries the 1 
ref. In some places where other ref'ed highways coincide with the TCH, the ref 
is recorded as "ref=1;19", for example. There are places within cities where 
the TCH runs on city roads with different names (e.g. Douglas Street in 
Victoria), so those ways are named with the local name and the TCH name is 
recorded in the alt_name or nat_name tag (a separate argument is which one of 
these to use). An alternate name should never be added to the primary name in 
brackets like proposed. That's exactly what the alt_name (and similar) tags are 
for. There are also many places where Trans-Canada Highway is the official 
local name of the road, like most of the highway in BC.

As for the correct spelling of the TCH, I think it would be fairly 
uncontroversial to standardize the name to "Trans-Canada Highway" or "Route 
Transcanadienne" where it's appropriate to use the TCH name, because those are 
the official spellings. Any variants can be considered errors.

As for varying highway classifications, this is correct and to be expected. 
Unlike the US interstate system, the Trans-Canada Highway network varies in 
construction and importance all across the country, so the classification can't 
be standardized to just motorway or trunk. There are sections where primary is 
the most appropriate, and possibly even secondary in some places. Just on 
Vancouver Island alone, the roads designated as the TCH vary from a six-lane 
motorway all the way down to a two-lane effectively-tertiary road.

Since there will need to be a lot of local knowledge required for such a 
project, I strongly recommend that this project not be undertaken by Telenav. 
This is the kind of work that Canadians should be doing, being the most 
familiar with the on-the-ground situation which will dictate how the highway is 
handled in each province. The numerous past issues with Telenav's contributions 
is also a factor that can't be ignored. Does it really make sense for a team of 
Romanians with a history of questionable decisions to be making sweeping 
changes to the Canadian national highway network? At least they've brought a 
proposal to the community this time rather than just push forward with a faulty 
plan like they have in the past. I'm still cleaning up after previous Telenav 
projects in my area that added countless non-existent turn restrictions and 
names and also removed valid data.

Andrew
Victoria, BC, Canada


From: "Olivia Robu - (p)" <olivia.r...@telenav.com>
To: "talk-ca" <talk-ca@openstreetmap.org>
Sent: Monday, March 26, 2018 4:20:16 AM
Subject: [Talk-ca] Trans-Canada Highway research

Hello,
The Telenav Map team has done some research on the status of the ways and 
relations of Trans-Canada Highway.
Here are some conclusions from this research:

  *   The highway is formed from 30 routes;
  *   Every route has different names for the name tag, such as: street names, 
other routes names or Trans-Canada highway name in different forms;
  *   The issue above is repeating for the ref tag;
  *   The name of Trans-Canada highway has more than one form (Trans-Canada 
Highway, TransCanada Highway, Trans Canada Highway, etc);
  *   Another issue is the variety of names in other tags related to it (such 
as: name:en, name:fr, alt_name, alt_name:en, alt_name:fr, nat_name);
  *   There are some routes that don’t have a route name only ref (5 routes);
  *   There are some routes that overlap:
 *   in Manitoba: - PTH 1 (MB Trans-Canada Highway) and Trans-Canada 
Highway (Super);
 - Yellowhead Highway and 
PTH 16 (MB Trans-Canada Highway);

 *   in Alberta: Trans-Canada Highway (A

Re: [Talk-ca] Trans-Canada Highway research

[Andrew Lester]

While standardization may be nice, it often won't be possible even within a 
single country. As has already been discussed, there are differing conventions 
in different provinces, so please don't try to apply a single plan to all 
provinces. How the TCH is handled in OSM will vary depending on the province. 

For example, in BC (and some other western provinces), the TCH carries the 1 
ref. In some places where other ref'ed highways coincide with the TCH, the ref 
is recorded as "ref=1;19", for example. There are places within cities where 
the TCH runs on city roads with different names (e.g. Douglas Street in 
Victoria), so those ways are named with the local name and the TCH name is 
recorded in the alt_name or nat_name tag (a separate argument is which one of 
these to use). An alternate name should never be added to the primary name in 
brackets like proposed. That's exactly what the alt_name (and similar) tags are 
for. There are also many places where Trans-Canada Highway is the official 
local name of the road, like most of the highway in BC. 

As for the correct spelling of the TCH, I think it would be fairly 
uncontroversial to standardize the name to "Trans-Canada Highway" or "Route 
Transcanadienne" where it's appropriate to use the TCH name, because those are 
the official spellings. Any variants can be considered errors. 

As for varying highway classifications, this is correct and to be expected. 
Unlike the US interstate system, the Trans-Canada Highway network varies in 
construction and importance all across the country, so the classification can't 
be standardized to just motorway or trunk. There are sections where primary is 
the most appropriate, and possibly even secondary in some places. Just on 
Vancouver Island alone, the roads designated as the TCH vary from a six-lane 
motorway all the way down to a two-lane effectively-tertiary road. 

Since there will need to be a lot of local knowledge required for such a 
project, I strongly recommend that this project not be undertaken by Telenav. 
This is the kind of work that Canadians should be doing, being the most 
familiar with the on-the-ground situation which will dictate how the highway is 
handled in each province. The numerous past issues with Telenav's contributions 
is also a factor that can't be ignored. Does it really make sense for a team of 
Romanians with a history of questionable decisions to be making sweeping 
changes to the Canadian national highway network? At least they've brought a 
proposal to the community this time rather than just push forward with a faulty 
plan like they have in the past. I'm still cleaning up after previous Telenav 
projects in my area that added countless non-existent turn restrictions and 
names and also removed valid data. 

Andrew 
Victoria, BC, Canada 


From: "Olivia Robu - (p)"  
To: "talk-ca"  
Sent: Monday, March 26, 2018 4:20:16 AM 
Subject: [Talk-ca] Trans-Canada Highway research 



Hello, 

The Telenav Map team has done some research on the status of the ways and 
relations of Trans-Canada Highway. 

Here are some conclusions from this research: 

* The highway is formed from 30 routes; 
* Every route has different names for the name tag, such as: street names, 
other routes names or Trans-Canada highway name in different forms; 
* The issue above is repeating for the ref tag; 
* The name of Trans-Canada highway has more than one form (Trans-Canada 
Highway, TransCanada Highway, Trans Canada Highway, etc); 
* Another issue is the variety of names in other tags related to it (such 
as: name:en, name:fr, alt_name, alt_name:en, alt_name:fr, nat_name); 
* There are some routes that don’t have a route name only ref (5 routes); 
* There are some routes that overlap: 
* in Manitoba: - PTH 1 (MB Trans-Canada Highway) and Trans-Canada 
Highway (Super); 


- Yellowhead Highway and PTH 16 (MB Trans-Canada Highway); 



* in Alberta: Trans-Canada Highway (AB) and Trans-Canada Highway 
(Super); 
* in British Columbia: - Trans-Canada Highway (BC, Super) and 
Trans-Canada Highway; 


* About 90% of these routes are broken; * About 80% of these routes 
have highway value flip flop (motorway, trunk, primary); 




We propose to make some improvements to standardize all the routes. We would 
like to get your thoughts and feedback on the following questions: 

* What is the correct form for the name that appears in the way name tag? 
For example: “Highway 417” is part of Trans-Canada Highway and has the name 
value tag “Highway 417”. To resolve this issue, we would need to standardize 
the ways’ name tag for all the provinces. The question is, should we modify the 
way names in to “Trans-Canada Highway”, or should we insert the name 
“Trans-Canada Highway” at the end of the name, like this: “Highway 417 
(Trans-Canada Highway)”, or should we leave it like it is? 
* Another issue 

Re: [Talk-ca] Trans-Canada Highway research

[Pierre Béland]

Sur la page wiki https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans-Canada_Highway, on voit 
que des panneaux Transcanada sont ajoutés sur le côté de la route. Cependant, 
au Québec comme en Ontario, les panneaux de navigation au-dessus de la route ne 
font pas de façon générale référence à la Transcanadienne. 
Comme le dit James, la Transcanadienne, c'est une méta-donnée. Une relation de 
type route permettrait de décrire ce réseau.  
Il serait aussi possible d'ajouter une référence à la Transcanadienne dans la 
clé ref. 
Exemple ref=417; TC(TC pour Transcanadienne).
Exemple où trois routes partagent un segment, ref=35; 104; 133.
voir https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/128245108#map=16/45.3227/-73.2309
Au dela du rendu sur la carte, ces références sont-elles utiles aux outils de 
navigation routière? En ajoutant TC, est-ce que l'on indiquerait à chaque fois, 
Continuez sur la route 417, Transcanadienne ?  Le risque est d'ajouter de la 
confusion dans les instructions de navigation.
Quel est l'objectif de l'équipe de Telenav pour harmoniser les références à la 
Transcanadienne et  ajouter les infos proposées ?

 
Pierre 
 

Le lundi 26 mars 2018 12 h 21 min 52 s HAE, James <james2...@gmail.com> a 
écrit :  
 
 http://openstreetview.org/details/23187/73
No trans-canada naming in sight because the trans-canada is a meta road 
composed of multiple highways. See road sign in OSV.
On Mon, Mar 26, 2018, 12:07 PM Kevin Farrugia, <kevinfarru...@gmail.com> wrote:

The proper name for the highways that are under the Kings Highway system 
(400-Series included) is "Highway xxx" or Highway xx, with the exception of the 
QEW.  Highways signs and government data follow the same rules.
The Trans-Canada as a name/deaignation is almost inconsequential in Ontario and 
to Ontarians.

---
Kevin Farrugia

On Mon, Mar 26, 2018, 11:46 AM Viajero Perdido, 
<viajero.perdido.spam.buc...@gmail.com> wrote:

On 18-03-26 05:33 AM, talk-ca-requ...@openstreetmap.org wrote:
> Message: 3
> Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2018 11:33:14 +
> From: James <james2...@gmail.com>
> To: "Olivia Robu - (p)" <olivia.r...@telenav.com>
> Cc: Talk-CA OpenStreetMap <talk-ca@openstreetmap.org>
> Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] Trans-Canada Highway research
> Message-ID:
>       <cank4qi_u9uveodoc8try-mic-xgxsxbuuv0n9pssjo0v+jr...@mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> highway 417 should be tagged as highway 417 and not principally transcanada
> way as this is how it's known locally. It can be tagged in transcanada
> relation, but it's mainly known as the 417

I disagree.  "Highway 417" is a low-value name, because the "ref" tag
should already contain the number, causing numbered shields to be
shown.  "Highway 417" is just a verbosification of the number.
"Trans-Canada Highway", however, is a real name; it belongs in the name
field.

This way, most maps would show both name and number.

To me, the (completely separate) issue is whether ordinary numbered
highways should have a name tag at all, "Highway nnn", or simply nothing
because "ref" takes care of it.  I've been able to find no guidance on
this, and I've looked.  I've been leaving "Highway nnn" in place when I
see it, which is most of the time.  But that's another discussion for
another day.

___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
  ___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] Trans-Canada Highway research

[James]

http://openstreetview.org/details/23187/73

No trans-canada naming in sight because the trans-canada is a meta road
composed of multiple highways. See road sign in OSV.

On Mon, Mar 26, 2018, 12:07 PM Kevin Farrugia, <kevinfarru...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> The proper name for the highways that are under the Kings Highway system
> (400-Series included) is "Highway xxx" or Highway xx, with the exception of
> the QEW.  Highways signs and government data follow the same rules.
>
> The Trans-Canada as a name/deaignation is almost inconsequential in
> Ontario and to Ontarians.
>
> ---
> Kevin Farrugia
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 26, 2018, 11:46 AM Viajero Perdido, <
> viajero.perdido.spam.buc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 18-03-26 05:33 AM, talk-ca-requ...@openstreetmap.org wrote:
>> > Message: 3
>> > Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2018 11:33:14 +
>> > From: James <james2...@gmail.com>
>> > To: "Olivia Robu - (p)" <olivia.r...@telenav.com>
>> > Cc: Talk-CA OpenStreetMap <talk-ca@openstreetmap.org>
>> > Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] Trans-Canada Highway research
>> > Message-ID:
>> >   <
>> cank4qi_u9uveodoc8try-mic-xgxsxbuuv0n9pssjo0v+jr...@mail.gmail.com>
>> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>> >
>> > highway 417 should be tagged as highway 417 and not principally
>> transcanada
>> > way as this is how it's known locally. It can be tagged in transcanada
>> > relation, but it's mainly known as the 417
>>
>> I disagree.  "Highway 417" is a low-value name, because the "ref" tag
>> should already contain the number, causing numbered shields to be
>> shown.  "Highway 417" is just a verbosification of the number.
>> "Trans-Canada Highway", however, is a real name; it belongs in the name
>> field.
>>
>> This way, most maps would show both name and number.
>>
>> To me, the (completely separate) issue is whether ordinary numbered
>> highways should have a name tag at all, "Highway nnn", or simply nothing
>> because "ref" takes care of it.  I've been able to find no guidance on
>> this, and I've looked.  I've been leaving "Highway nnn" in place when I
>> see it, which is most of the time.  But that's another discussion for
>> another day.
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-ca mailing list
>> Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
>>
> ___
> Talk-ca mailing list
> Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
>
___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] Trans-Canada Highway research

[Kevin Farrugia]

The proper name for the highways that are under the Kings Highway system
(400-Series included) is "Highway xxx" or Highway xx, with the exception of
the QEW.  Highways signs and government data follow the same rules.

The Trans-Canada as a name/deaignation is almost inconsequential in Ontario
and to Ontarians.

---
Kevin Farrugia


On Mon, Mar 26, 2018, 11:46 AM Viajero Perdido, <
viajero.perdido.spam.buc...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 18-03-26 05:33 AM, talk-ca-requ...@openstreetmap.org wrote:
> > Message: 3
> > Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2018 11:33:14 +
> > From: James <james2...@gmail.com>
> > To: "Olivia Robu - (p)" <olivia.r...@telenav.com>
> > Cc: Talk-CA OpenStreetMap <talk-ca@openstreetmap.org>
> > Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] Trans-Canada Highway research
> > Message-ID:
> >   <
> cank4qi_u9uveodoc8try-mic-xgxsxbuuv0n9pssjo0v+jr...@mail.gmail.com>
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
> >
> > highway 417 should be tagged as highway 417 and not principally
> transcanada
> > way as this is how it's known locally. It can be tagged in transcanada
> > relation, but it's mainly known as the 417
>
> I disagree.  "Highway 417" is a low-value name, because the "ref" tag
> should already contain the number, causing numbered shields to be
> shown.  "Highway 417" is just a verbosification of the number.
> "Trans-Canada Highway", however, is a real name; it belongs in the name
> field.
>
> This way, most maps would show both name and number.
>
> To me, the (completely separate) issue is whether ordinary numbered
> highways should have a name tag at all, "Highway nnn", or simply nothing
> because "ref" takes care of it.  I've been able to find no guidance on
> this, and I've looked.  I've been leaving "Highway nnn" in place when I
> see it, which is most of the time.  But that's another discussion for
> another day.
>
> ___
> Talk-ca mailing list
> Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
>
___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] Trans-Canada Highway research

[john whelan]

Locally we call it the 417 and my understanding is local names are used in
OSM.  You can use alternative names but to me trans canada highway is a
collection of local roads paid for locally.

Cheerio John

On 26 March 2018 at 11:45, Viajero Perdido <
viajero.perdido.spam.buc...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 18-03-26 05:33 AM, talk-ca-requ...@openstreetmap.org wrote:
>
>> Message: 3
>> Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2018 11:33:14 +
>> From: James <james2...@gmail.com>
>> To: "Olivia Robu - (p)" <olivia.r...@telenav.com>
>> Cc: Talk-CA OpenStreetMap <talk-ca@openstreetmap.org>
>> Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] Trans-Canada Highway research
>> Message-ID:
>> <CANk4qi_U9uveoDoc8TrY-MiC-XgxSXBUUv0n9PSSjO0v+jRBFw@mail.
>> gmail.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>>
>> highway 417 should be tagged as highway 417 and not principally
>> transcanada
>> way as this is how it's known locally. It can be tagged in transcanada
>> relation, but it's mainly known as the 417
>>
>
> I disagree.  "Highway 417" is a low-value name, because the "ref" tag
> should already contain the number, causing numbered shields to be shown.
> "Highway 417" is just a verbosification of the number. "Trans-Canada
> Highway", however, is a real name; it belongs in the name field.
>
> This way, most maps would show both name and number.
>
> To me, the (completely separate) issue is whether ordinary numbered
> highways should have a name tag at all, "Highway nnn", or simply nothing
> because "ref" takes care of it.  I've been able to find no guidance on
> this, and I've looked.  I've been leaving "Highway nnn" in place when I see
> it, which is most of the time.  But that's another discussion for another
> day.
>
> ___
> Talk-ca mailing list
> Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
>
___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] Trans-Canada Highway research

[Viajero Perdido]

On 18-03-26 05:33 AM, talk-ca-requ...@openstreetmap.org wrote:

Message: 3
Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2018 11:33:14 +
From: James <james2...@gmail.com>
To: "Olivia Robu - (p)" <olivia.r...@telenav.com>
Cc: Talk-CA OpenStreetMap <talk-ca@openstreetmap.org>
Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] Trans-Canada Highway research
Message-ID:
<cank4qi_u9uveodoc8try-mic-xgxsxbuuv0n9pssjo0v+jr...@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

highway 417 should be tagged as highway 417 and not principally transcanada
way as this is how it's known locally. It can be tagged in transcanada
relation, but it's mainly known as the 417


I disagree.  "Highway 417" is a low-value name, because the "ref" tag 
should already contain the number, causing numbered shields to be 
shown.  "Highway 417" is just a verbosification of the number. 
"Trans-Canada Highway", however, is a real name; it belongs in the name 
field.


This way, most maps would show both name and number.

To me, the (completely separate) issue is whether ordinary numbered 
highways should have a name tag at all, "Highway nnn", or simply nothing 
because "ref" takes care of it.  I've been able to find no guidance on 
this, and I've looked.  I've been leaving "Highway nnn" in place when I 
see it, which is most of the time.  But that's another discussion for 
another day.


___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] Trans-Canada Highway research

[Matthew Darwin]

I should clarify my comment below that in some places the "local road 
name" is "Trans-Canada Highway".



I think it would be helpful if you split out your proposal province by 
province.  Provincial governments are generally responsible for 
highways (including the TCH), so the naming is consistent only within 
a province.  Please review 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans-Canada_Highway


On 2018-03-26 09:25 AM, Matthew Darwin wrote:


  * Another question is related to the priority of the names in the
name value tag and also for the ref tag. If we have a way that
has a street name (“Old Highway 16” or “North York River Road”)
and two routes that overlap (ex: Trans-Canada Highway and
Highway 11). What is the name and the ref that should appear in
the way name tag and ref tag?



Highway 11.  Local road first.


___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] Trans-Canada Highway research

[Matthew Darwin]

On 2018-03-26 07:20 AM, Olivia Robu - (p) wrote:


Hello,

The Telenav Map team has done some research on the status of the 
ways and relations of Trans-Canada Highway.


Here are some conclusions from this research:

  * The highway is formed from 30 routes;



The Trans-Canada highway is not really 1 highway, so this is probably 
not surprising.   In many places, the Trans-Canada highway splits in 
2, so probably cannot have 1 route anyway.


  * Every route has different names for the name tag, such as:
street names, other routes names or Trans-Canada highway name in
different forms;
  * The issue above is repeating for the ref tag;



IMO the routes and the refs need to match, or the refs need to be 
removed given that routes should supersede refs.  In my investigations 
in Ontario I see lots of places where routes and refs don't match.


  * The name of Trans-Canada highway has more than one form
(Trans-Canada Highway, TransCanada Highway, Trans Canada
Highway, etc);



Probably good to standardize that.  However, in Quebec I would think 
the French name would take precedence. "/Route Transcanadienne"/



  * Another issue is the variety of names in other tags related to
it (such as: name:en, name:fr, alt_name, alt_name:en,
alt_name:fr, nat_name);
  * There are some routes that don’t have a route name only ref (5
routes);
  * There are some routes that overlap:
  o in Manitoba: - PTH 1 (MB Trans-Canada Highway) and
Trans-Canada Highway (Super);

- Yellowhead Highway and PTH 16 (MB Trans-Canada Highway);

  o in Alberta: Trans-Canada Highway (AB) and Trans-Canada
Highway (Super);
  o in British Columbia: - Trans-Canada Highway (BC, Super) and
Trans-Canada Highway;

  * About 90% of these routes are broken;
  * About 80% of these routes have highway value flip flop
(motorway, trunk, primary);



Highway 17 in Ontario is not a motorway.  So I would expect different 
segments to be different.  Highway 417 (motorway) changes to Highway 
17 (trunk) just west of Arnprior Ontario.  This is correct.


We propose to make some improvements to standardize all the routes. 
We would like to get your thoughts and feedback on the following 
questions:


  * What is the correct form for the name that appears in the way
name tag? For example: “Highway 417” is part of Trans-Canada
Highway and has the name value tag “Highway 417”. To resolve
this issue, we would need to standardize the ways’ name tag for
all the provinces. The question is, should we modify the way
names in to “Trans-Canada Highway”, or should we insert the name
“Trans-Canada Highway” at the end of the name, like this:
“Highway 417 (Trans-Canada Highway)”, or should we leave it like
it is?



No, definitely not.


 *


  * Another issue is related to the official name of the highway.
According to our research the official name for Trans-Canada
Highway is “Trans-Canada Highway”. In our research we have found
several forms of this name: TransCanada Highway, Trans Canada
Highway, etc. Should we change all the names to “Trans-Canada
Highway”?


In Quebec probably "/Route Transcanadienne"/


 *


  * Another question is related to the priority of the names in the
name value tag and also for the ref tag. If we have a way that
has a street name (“Old Highway 16” or “North York River Road”)
and two routes that overlap (ex: Trans-Canada Highway and
Highway 11). What is the name and the ref that should appear in
the way name tag and ref tag?



Highway 11.  Local road first.


 *


  * In case of overlapping identical routes (ex: in Manitoba there
is two routes for Trans-Canada Highway). What should be the best
approach?

The Trans-Canada Highway has multiple routes.  It is not one highway.  
The graphic on wikipedia, probably shows this clearly. 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans-Canada_Highway


 *


  * In case of highway value flip flop (motorway, trunk, primary),
there are several segments like this outside the cities (ex.:
Route “Ontario Highway 17 (Blind River to North Bay) (ID
3739829)”, or Route “Trans Canada Highway 104” (ID 1732797)).
For areas outside the cities we propose to change the highway
value into motorway/trunk. What do you think about this issue?



If it is really a motorway, yes.  But many places outside of cities it 
is not a motorway.


 *


We think that one approach to resolve the first problem could be to 
add “Trans-Canada Highway” or “Highway 417 (Trans-Canada Highway)” 
to the way name for all the routes, and the ref number correspondent 
to each route that forms the Trans-Canada Highway.




You could add an alt_name or similar tag.


We look forward to hearing your feedback and hope to improve the 
situation together.


Here is the link to github ticket that we created: 
https://github.com/TelenavMapping/mapping-projects/issues/57





Highway 17 just west of 

Re: [Talk-ca] Trans-Canada Highway research

[Martin Chalifoux]

My two cents. 

I think what James said  is the same everywhere. The name field on the way 
usually carry the local name, the one given by the local authorities (town, 
province).  If you Google Streetview local signs, that is the name you usually 
see in the area. However the relation “attaching” all the pieces of road should 
be called “Trans-Canada Highway” and you can standardise that one.
 
With regards to the type of road, should reflect the physical and use 
characteristics of the stretch of road. Motorway is ONLY for a proper motorway 
with no intersection, stop, light, etc. A lot if not most of the Trans-Canada 
is not made of motorways. Trunk is a good choice is this road is a really major 
road for the area. Primary might still make sense … must consider locally.

Works of caution with Trunk, it leaves the bicycle access field unspecified and 
that screws-up some routing engines, so if you change a primary/secondary to 
Trunk PLEASE explicitly set the bicycle=yes tag (unless it is explicitly not 
allowed). Since by default it is “unspecified”  I have seen many routing 
engines erring on the side of cautiousness and assume it is NO. Most of the 
time it is actually YES. In Quebec a large portion of the 117 up north is 
actually part of the Route Verte and as such bicycle=designated is even used 
although the way is a trunk road. Cyclist can safely use the wide shoulders in 
those areas (most of the time…).

I think the ref field on the way must reflect the local numbering ile. 117, 
417, etc. If the Trans-Canada highway has another numbering on top of that then 
put that one in the relation, not the way.

This may be confusing when compared to the US interstate system which is more 
standardized I think. Here in Canada the Trans-Canada get some federal funding 
but the roads remain administered locally for the most part. The OSM relation 
is really the place to tag all related to the Trans-Canada Highway proper, and 
the way remains the properties of the local authorities… hope that makes any 
sense.

Cheers.

> On Mar 26, 2018, at 07:33, James  wrote:
> 
> highway 417 should be tagged as highway 417 and not principally transcanada 
> way as this is how it's known locally. It can be tagged in transcanada 
> relation, but it's mainly known as the 417
> 
> On Mon, Mar 26, 2018, 7:22 AM Olivia Robu - (p),  > wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> The Telenav Map team has done some research on the status of the ways and 
> relations of Trans-Canada Highway.
> 
> Here are some conclusions from this research:
> 
> The highway is formed from 30 routes;
> Every route has different names for the name tag, such as: street names, 
> other routes names or Trans-Canada highway name in different forms;
> The issue above is repeating for the ref tag;
> The name of Trans-Canada highway has more than one form (Trans-Canada 
> Highway, TransCanada Highway, Trans Canada Highway, etc);
> Another issue is the variety of names in other tags related to it (such as: 
> name:en, name:fr, alt_name, alt_name:en, alt_name:fr, nat_name);
> There are some routes that don’t have a route name only ref (5 routes);
> There are some routes that overlap:
> in Manitoba: - PTH 1 (MB Trans-Canada Highway) and Trans-Canada Highway 
> (Super);
>  - Yellowhead Highway and 
> PTH 16 (MB Trans-Canada Highway);
> 
> in Alberta: Trans-Canada Highway (AB) and Trans-Canada Highway (Super);
> in British Columbia: - Trans-Canada Highway (BC, Super) and Trans-Canada 
> Highway;
> About 90% of these routes are broken;
> About 80% of these routes have highway value flip flop (motorway, trunk, 
> primary);
>  
> 
> We propose to make some improvements to standardize all the routes. We would 
> like to get your thoughts and feedback on the following questions:
> 
> What is the correct form for the name that appears in the way name tag? For 
> example: “Highway 417” is part of Trans-Canada Highway and has the name value 
> tag “Highway 417”. To resolve this issue, we would need to standardize the 
> ways’ name tag for all the provinces. The question is, should we modify the 
> way names in to “Trans-Canada Highway”, or should we insert the name 
> “Trans-Canada Highway” at the end of the name, like this: “Highway 417 
> (Trans-Canada Highway)”, or should we leave it like it is?
> Another issue is related to the official name of the highway. According to 
> our research the official name for Trans-Canada Highway is “Trans-Canada 
> Highway”. In our research we have found several forms of this name: 
> TransCanada Highway, Trans Canada Highway, etc. Should we change all the 
> names to “Trans-Canada Highway”?
> Another question is related to the priority of the names in the name value 
> tag and also for the ref tag. If we have a way that has a street name (“Old 
> Highway 16” or “North York River Road”) and two routes that overlap (ex: 
> 

Re: [Talk-ca] Trans-Canada Highway research

[James]

highway 417 should be tagged as highway 417 and not principally transcanada
way as this is how it's known locally. It can be tagged in transcanada
relation, but it's mainly known as the 417

On Mon, Mar 26, 2018, 7:22 AM Olivia Robu - (p), 
wrote:

> Hello,
>
> The Telenav Map team has done some research on the status of the ways and
> relations of Trans-Canada Highway.
>
> Here are some conclusions from this research:
>
>- The highway is formed from 30 routes;
>- Every route has different names for the name tag, such as: street
>names, other routes names or Trans-Canada highway name in different forms;
>- The issue above is repeating for the ref tag;
>- The name of Trans-Canada highway has more than one form
>(Trans-Canada Highway, TransCanada Highway, Trans Canada Highway, etc);
>- Another issue is the variety of names in other tags related to it
>(such as: name:en, name:fr, alt_name, alt_name:en, alt_name:fr, nat_name);
>- There are some routes that don’t have a route name only ref (5
>routes);
>- There are some routes that overlap:
>   - in Manitoba: - PTH 1 (MB Trans-Canada Highway) and Trans-Canada
>   Highway (Super);
>
>  - Yellowhead Highway
> and PTH 16 (MB Trans-Canada Highway);
>
>- in Alberta: Trans-Canada Highway (AB) and Trans-Canada Highway
>   (Super);
>   - in British Columbia: - Trans-Canada Highway (BC, Super) and
>   Trans-Canada Highway;
>
>
>- About 90% of these routes are broken;
>- About 80% of these routes have highway value flip flop (motorway,
>trunk, primary);
>
>
>
> We propose to make some improvements to standardize all the routes. We
> would like to get your thoughts and feedback on the following questions:
>
>- What is the correct form for the name that appears in the way name
>tag? For example: “Highway 417” is part of Trans-Canada Highway and has the
>name value tag “Highway 417”. To resolve this issue, we would need to
>standardize the ways’ name tag for all the provinces. The question is,
>should we modify the way names in to “Trans-Canada Highway”, or should we
>insert the name “Trans-Canada Highway” at the end of the name, like this:
>“Highway 417 (Trans-Canada Highway)”, or should we leave it like it is?
>- Another issue is related to the official name of the highway.
>According to our research the official name for Trans-Canada Highway is
>“Trans-Canada Highway”. In our research we have found several forms of this
>name: TransCanada Highway, Trans Canada Highway, etc. Should we change all
>the names to “Trans-Canada Highway”?
>
>
>- Another question is related to the priority of the names in the name
>value tag and also for the ref tag. If we have a way that has a street name
>(“Old Highway 16” or “North York River Road”) and two routes that overlap
>(ex: Trans-Canada Highway and Highway 11). What is the name and the ref
>that should appear in the way name tag and ref tag?
>- In case of overlapping identical routes (ex: in Manitoba there is
>two routes for Trans-Canada Highway). What should be the best approach?
>- In case of highway value flip flop (motorway, trunk, primary), there
>are several segments like this outside the cities (ex.: Route “Ontario
>Highway 17 (Blind River to North Bay) (ID 3739829)”, or Route “Trans Canada
>Highway 104” (ID 1732797)). For areas outside the cities we propose to
>change the highway value into motorway/trunk. What do you think about this
>issue?
>
>
>
> We think that one approach to resolve the first problem could be to add
> “Trans-Canada Highway” or “Highway 417 (Trans-Canada Highway)” to the way
> name for all the routes, and the ref number correspondent to each route
> that forms the Trans-Canada Highway.
>
>
>
> We look forward to hearing your feedback and hope to improve the situation
> together.
>
>
>
> Here is the link to github ticket that we created:
> https://github.com/TelenavMapping/mapping-projects/issues/57
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Olivia Robu
> ___
> Talk-ca mailing list
> Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
>
___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca