I totally agree with you, the definition you provide, administrative-free,
tends to the same osm map between countries.


Le jeu. 15 févr. 2018 à 19:18, Fernando Trebien <fernando.treb...@gmail.com>
a écrit :

> Landing on this discussion several months late. I've just heard of it
> by reading a wiki talk page [1].
> Since 13 February 2009, the wiki [2] criticises highway classification
> as problematic/unverifiable. This has also been subject to a lot of
> controversy (and edit wars) in my local community (Brazil), especially
> regarding the effect of (lack of) pavement.
> In trying to achieve greater consensus some years ago, I decided to
> seek opinions elsewhere and finally I arrived at this scheme [3] which
> I think is very useful, if not perfect yet. It can be easily
> summarised like this:
> - trunk: best routes between large/important cities
> - primary: best routes between cities and above
> - secondary: best routes between towns/suburbs and above
> - tertiary: best routes between villages/neighbourhoods and above
> - unclassified: best routes between other place=* and above
> For example, the best route between two villages would be at least
> tertiary. So would be the best route between a village and a town or a
> city. Parts of this route might have a higher class in case they are
> part of a route between more important places.
> It surely raises the problem of determining optimal routes. Maybe a
> sensible criterion would be average travel time without traffic
> congestion. A number of vehicles may be selected for this average -
> could be motorcycle+car+bus+truck, or simply car+truck.
> Early results in my area [4, in Portuguese] seem promising and have
> produced more consensus than any previous proposals. To me, this
> method seems to:
> - resist alternations in classification along the same road
> - work across borders (where classification discontinuities are
> expected because each country is using different classification
> criteria)
> - account for road network topology
> - work in countries with mostly precarious/unpaved roads or
> without/unknown official highway classes
> - work between settlements as well as within settlements
> Borderline cases are probably inescapable in any system that does not
> use solely criteria that are directly verifiable - from the ground, or
> from the law. Maybe, in certain developed countries, the system is so
> well organized that merely checking signs/laws is sufficient. That
> does not mean it is like that everywhere on the planet.
> OSM has so far received a lot of input from communities in developed
> countries (mostly Europe, North America and Australia) and hasn't
> given much attention to less developed/organized countries. What comes
> closest to this is what the HOT Team does, but the judgment of road
> classification one can do from satellite images in a foreign country
> is much more limited than the criteria that have been raised in this
> thread so far.
> I wouldn't endorse tags such as maxspeed:practical due to lack of
> verifiability (it should be obvious that different types of vehicles
> would achieve different practical speeds). It is better to use the
> legal speed in maxspeed=* and describe the practical reason for a
> lower speed using surface=*, smoothness=*, and, who knows, maybe the
> not yet approved hazard=* [5] (though that is intended for signed
> hazards, not subjective/opinionated hazards).
> For the sake of long-term sanity, I also wouldn't mix the purpose of
> one tag with the purpose of other tags. To describe the surface, there
> is surface=*, smoothness=* and tracktype=*. To describe access rights,
> there is access=*, foot=*, bicycle=*, motor_vehicle=*, etc. To
> describe legal speed, maxspeed=*. To describe curves, there's
> geometry.
> Purpose, perhaps, is the main issue. What is the purpose of highway
> classification? Is it to save us the work of adding extra tags? Is it
> to allow the renderer to produce a cleaner output at low zoom levels?
> Is it to allow routers to assume default speeds? Maybe to guide their
> routing heuristics? Is it to express some sort of importance? If so,
> by which perspective - urbanistic, traffic engineering, movement,
> commercial value, cultural/fame, historic, some combination of those?
> Should the purpose be the same in every country?
> It may be interesting to also discuss the classification adopted by
> other maps. I don't have a reference for Google (originally TeleAtlas)
> or Here.com (originally Navteq), but Waze publishes its per-country
> road classification criteria in its wiki. [6-16]
> [1]
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Tag:highway%3Dtrunk#change_.22high_performance.22_to_.22high_importance.22
> [2] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Verifiability#Problematic_tags
> [3]
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Ftrebien/Drafts/Generic_highway_classification_principles#Schematic_diagram_and_general_comments
> [4] https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=674296#p674296
> [5] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/hazard
> [6] https://wazeopedia.waze.com/wiki/USA/Road_types
> [7] https://wazeopedia.waze.com/wiki/UnitedKingdom/Roads#Road_types
> [8] https://wazeopedia.waze.com/wiki/Canada/Main_Page#Road_Types
> [9] https://wazeopedia.waze.com/wiki/Commons/Road_Types/India
> [10]
> https://wazeopedia.waze.com/wiki/Brazil/Como_categorizar_e_nomear_vias
> [11] https://wazeopedia.waze.com/wiki/Germany/Kartenlegende_(Deutschland)
> [12] https://wazeopedia.waze.com/wiki/France/Classification_France
> [13] https://wazeopedia.waze.com/wiki/Italy/Tipologia_delle_strade
> [14] https://wazeopedia.waze.com/wiki/Indonesia/Panduan_Tipe_Jalan
> [15] https://wiki.waze.com/wiki/%E9%81%93%E8%B7%AF%E7%B1%BB%E5%9E%8B
> [16]
> https://wiki.waze.com/wiki/%E3%80%8C%E9%81%93%E8%B7%AF%E7%A8%AE%E5%88%A5%E3%80%8D
> --
> Fernando Trebien
> +55 (51) 99962-5409
> "Nullius in verba."
> _______________________________________________
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
talk mailing list

Reply via email to