OK, so I came into some free time and completed the tracing of the Dempster Highway into OSM. Some points:
1) I have tagged it as a primary highway. It is, after all, called the Dempster Highway. Also, it is the only ground link to Inuvik, thus fairly important 2) I have tagged the surface as gravel. 3) I came across an unfinished Dempster Highway portion in Northern Yukon. This was tagged as a tertiary highway, and as part of the Trans-Canada Trail (ncn and ncn_ref attributes). I deleted the portions for which I had accurate GPS traces, and merged the two somewhere inside of NT, changing the highway to primary. 4) The entire Dempster Highway is now tagged as a Trans-Canada Trail. 5) I've also tagged as bicycle=yes, as a) I saw many cyclists and b) the tertiary route I came across also had this! I'll be adding in further POI's along the route when I can extract my diary files, and going on to update the rest of what we travelled in the summer. Question: Is there a Trans-Canada Trail relation I should have used? Couldn't find one... Tim -----Original Message----- From: James Ewen <[email protected]> To: Talk-CA OpenStreetMap <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] Highways in Yukon Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2010 19:59:25 -0700 On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 7:18 PM, Richard Weait <[email protected]> wrote: >> One has to think about how the final map is going to be displayed. > > Now that is a little close to tagging for the renderer. Yes, but I've been chastised about that statement before... we are not tagging incorrectly to simply work around the renderer rules, but rather tagging as to road classification importance, which the renderer simply renders differently. If the data stored in the OSM database is not useful to the user, then it may as well not be included. Back to my GPS... the major roads in the TeleAtlas database cause routing problems. The routing routine will take me on a 350 km detour just to stay on highways, rather than a 200 km direct route on what it considers a major road. These major roads are indistinguishable from the highways as far as physical features are concerned. Speed limits are also identical. I'd prefer to have these major roads promoted to the same classification as the highways (in fact they are highways of the same classification as the others)... as a side effect, the renderer in the GPS would end up showing these roads that were previously not visible. Just because the renderer changes the display doesn't mean that I am specifically trying to misrepresent the road for the renderer. The renderers take the tags we use into account when deciding on how to display a way, so it is only appropriate that we also take into account how the renderer will display the tags we are deciding to use. It would be inappropriate to tag a stream as a coastline just to get it to show up on a wide area map... it is however appropriate in my opinion to tag an important major road (read only road) across a large expanse of territory at an appropriate classification level, despite what the rendering engines will do with it. The database and renderers are pretty much married to each other. Without the database, the renderers are useless. Without the renderers, it's pretty hard to visualize the data. James VE6SRV _______________________________________________ Talk-ca mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca _______________________________________________ Talk-ca mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
