Martijn, I think it would be conceptually clearest for all the 2-way single carriageway ways to point the same way and would suggest that this should normally in be the direction of increasing milepoints/pointes kilometriques (usually northwards or eastwards). At Castle Rock we call this the positive travel direction (increasing linear reference values) while the decreasing milepoint direction (reducing milepoints/pointes kilometriques) we would call the negative direction. It would be great for us if OSM forward tied in with milepoint increases.
Inevitably there is an occasional glitch in states such as Idaho where "DOT milepoints" actually reverse direction for sections of 2 or 3 state routes statewide, due to legacy signposting and route redesignation, but this is probably less than 1% of routes nationally. More common is minor milepoint jumps (where routes have been shortened by new construction) and minor milepoint repeats (where bypasses are longer than the original through route; a situation that Washington State calls backmiles and Caltrans calls formulas). Despite this, there is almost always a mostly consistent increasing milepoint (OSM potential PK tag) postive travel direction that could become OSM forward on 2-way single carriageways. We plan to begin adding PK consistently across many states in 2014, with our state DOT partners, FYI. It would be nice if this fitted in with the work you are doing at Telenav. Just a thought. Peter On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 7:24 PM, Kevin Kenny <kken...@nycap.rr.com> wrote: > On 11/26/2013 01:58 PM, Martijn van Exel wrote: > >> There is some discussion going on over on the wiki page I created on >> this topic: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Highway_Directions_ >> In_The_United_States >> Mostly dealing with how to prevent redundant relations where the >> numbered route is a bidirectional road (i.e. there are no separate OSM >> ways for the opposite travel directions.) >> >> One idea I think is perhaps the most promising is to have the ways >> forming a bidirectional stretch of the route all point in the same >> direction and tag the member roles so they correspond to the direction >> of the ways. I have done this here for US 6 in Utah as an example: >> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/19131911 where I >> reversed the bidirectional stretches where appropriate so all of them >> point in the same direction. I then added 'west' as the member role >> for all these stretches, and added 'east' and 'west' member roles as >> appropriate for the unidirectional / oneway stretches. >> Let me know what you think. >> >> By the way, doing this for a big relation like this one, really >> convinced me that we need at least the cardinal support for JOSM that >> James mentioned. Better, more intuitive relation editing tools in >> general in the longer run. >> >> Martijn >> >> On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 6:14 AM, James Mast <rickmastfa...@hotmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> So, nobody has a comment on my idea (from the 22nd) of getting JOSM to >>> show >>> north/south or east/west splits in the relation editor to be displayed >>> the >>> same way as the forward/backward gets shown already? I would try to do >>> some >>> coding to allow that to happen in JOSM, but I don't know how to code in >>> Java. >>> >>> -James >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Talk-us mailing list >>> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org >>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us >>> >>> >> >> Careful with the data model. There is a case near me where I-890 West > and NY-7 East are the same road. > > > -- > 73 de ke9tv/2, Kevin > > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-us mailing list > Talk-us@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us >
_______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
