Re: [OSM-talk] What's the policy on unsurveyed roads from imagery?
On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 3:55 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote: Honestly, I don't know if speed bumps would come into play or not. I kind of assume there wouldn't be a primary road which has speed bumps, but I'm willing to be proven wrong on that. Furthermore, there might not be any road which would have been defined as primary were it not for the speed bumps, so this part of the definition might be irrelevant. Dunno about Australia, Europe and the States, but here in Brazil where I map I can mention one example, federal highway BR-484 from Cachoeiro de Itapimirim have a few speed bumpers in Cachoeiro, passes along the edge of Jeronimo Monteiro, along the federal highway (which should be tagged primary according to the current definitions) have 14 speed bumpers while passing this city. The same on the entrance and exit of Alegre, further when passing Celina there are two speed bumpers in the intersection, another few speed bumpers when passing Guacui, and finally infront of the Policia Rodoviaria Estadual located in Dores de Rio Preto. I am not mentioning the continued track in Minas Gerais state as I am not familiar with it. Also, federal highway BR-262 from Vitoria to Belo Horizonte passes a few speed bumps when passing through the urban areas of some cities, currently tagged as trunk. As far as I know none of these speed bumps are yet tagged. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] What's the policy on unsurveyed roads from imagery?
On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 11:27 PM, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Dec 27, 2009 at 3:08 AM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote: That said, I personally find the highway tagging guidelines difficult to apply anyway. In states without formal legal road classifications we might as well mark everything except motorways and service roads as road for all I can tell. Anything else is just tagging for the renderer. Definitely the worst misunderstanding of tagging for the renderer that I've seen so far. If I understand you right, you see two options for tagging: either tag everything 100% objectively based on hard facts like speed limits and documentation, or tag completely arbitrarily. You certainly don't understand me right. Where do you read that I suggested that tagging completely arbitrarily is an option? There are an infinite number of options for tagging. But there's only one correct one - use objective definitions. Suffice to say there is a very healthy middle ground, where there *is* benefit in distinguishing primary roads from tertiary from residential...even if based on rough observation. Rough observation of what? I have no problem with rough observation. What I have a problem with is everyone making up their own definition. Once you've made up the definitions of primary, secondary, and tertiary, I think you'll find that applying those definitions can be easily automated. Sure, there might be some tweaks here and there where we find we need to add exceptions to the original definitions (e.g. a road with speed bumps is never a primary), but at least you'll end up with a consistent system. Mapping a road the wrong color when there aren't any traffic_calming tags is another great way to get people adding appropriate tags. What's so important about traffic_calming tags? True, they will affect accurate trip time planning, but is that it? You wouldn't want to color a road with speed bumps as a primary, would you? ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] What's the policy on unsurveyed roads from imagery?
On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 1:34 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.comwrote: 2009/12/29 Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com: What's so important about traffic_calming tags? True, they will affect accurate trip time planning, but is that it? He's assuming it's a objective way to map residential streets, main through fares generally don't have traffic calming devices. However that doesn't always hold water here since those ways might be the main shopping area of small towns, so you need to distinguish them from alternative routes as well. Honestly, I don't know if speed bumps would come into play or not. I kind of assume there wouldn't be a primary road which has speed bumps, but I'm willing to be proven wrong on that. Furthermore, there might not be any road which would have been defined as primary were it not for the speed bumps, so this part of the definition might be irrelevant. I don't know what the perfect definition is. But I think we'd be much better off putting in a definition, looking at the map, tweaking the definition, looking at the map again, etc. until we have something we like, then telling people go map primary/secondary/tertiary based on whatever definition you feel like using and expecting to get very useful results. I don't think this can be completely tagged in an objective manner like that simply because some streets that are now less important for traffic are still very important for pedestrian traffic and where pedestrians want to drive to before they become pedestrians. I'm not sure what exactly that means, but whatever it does mean, why can't it be incorporated into the definition? ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] What's the policy on unsurveyed roads from imagery?
(e.g. a road with speed bumps is never a primary) You've obviously never been to Mexico City. - L ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] What's the policy on unsurveyed roads from imagery?
I'm afraid I wasn't mapping that day, but on a minibus jaunt out to San Andrés Mixquic from la Ciudad (in order to celebrate the Day of the Dead) we slowed down to about 5 mph for speed humps many times, several times on dual carriageways! - L On 29 Dec 2009, at 18:22, Anthony wrote: On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 1:08 PM, Laurence Penney l...@lorp.org wrote: (e.g. a road with speed bumps is never a primary) You've obviously never been to Mexico City. - L No, I haven't, but do you have a specific counter-example in mind? ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] What's the policy on unsurveyed roads from imagery?
2009/12/27 Stephen Hope slh...@gmail.com 2009/12/27 John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com: In Australia there is this legacy speed limit sign for people with racing licenses that they can drive any speed they wish, everyone else is limited to 100, how exactly do you map that? (and I saw one such sign only the day before yesterday). Umm, actually that one's a bit of an urban myth. The sign (and it's a UN standard sign, not just Australian) means end of local speed limits, back to State/Country default speed limit. The racing licence thing comes from very old rule in NSW where they didn't enforce the limit (for anybody) as long as you were not driving at excessive or dangerous speeds, and no longer applies. Somebody once used the I'm a racing driver, it's not excessive for me excuse and got off. As long as you know the state default speed limit, this is easy to tag. It is exactly the same as a sign with that limit. in Germany there is indeed no speed limit (Ende aller Streckenverbote translates to end of all restrictions) after this sign (on motorways and dual cariageways outside town limits), so there was a proposal for a tag some time ago, which was strongly rejected: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/maxspeed_none see the discussion page for more info. cheers, Martin ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] What's the policy on unsurveyed roads from imagery?
2009/12/29 Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com: in Germany there is indeed no speed limit (Ende aller Streckenverbote translates to end of all restrictions) after this sign (on motorways and dual cariageways outside town limits), so there was a proposal for a tag some time ago, which was strongly rejected: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/maxspeed_none I find the reasons it was rejected to be poorly thought out, as Lulu-Ann wrote, untagged isn't the same thing as unsurveyed. Instead of words, in programming -1 is often used to express no limit. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] What's the policy on unsurveyed roads from imagery?
On Sun, Dec 27, 2009 at 3:08 AM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote: That said, I personally find the highway tagging guidelines difficult to apply anyway. In states without formal legal road classifications we might as well mark everything except motorways and service roads as road for all I can tell. Anything else is just tagging for the renderer. Definitely the worst misunderstanding of tagging for the renderer that I've seen so far. If I understand you right, you see two options for tagging: either tag everything 100% objectively based on hard facts like speed limits and documentation, or tag completely arbitrarily. Suffice to say there is a very healthy middle ground, where there *is* benefit in distinguishing primary roads from tertiary from residential...even if based on rough observation. I guess to some extent it's a question of whether or not a street map database without speed limits is good enough. I'd say it is not. At least not in the more heavily populated areas of the world. I suppose all the bicyclists in OSM would disagree with that, but they don't have much use for primary/secondary/tertiary designations either, do they? Distinctions like that are indeed important for cyclists, because they generally prefer to avoid trunk/primary/secondary roads in favour of tertiary/residential. You don't need to know the exact speed limit of a road to know that trunk is faster/busier/more dangerous than residential. Mapping a road the wrong color when there aren't any traffic_calming tags is another great way to get people adding appropriate tags. What's so important about traffic_calming tags? True, they will affect accurate trip time planning, but is that it? Steve ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] What's the policy on unsurveyed roads from imagery?
2009/12/29 Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com: What's so important about traffic_calming tags? True, they will affect accurate trip time planning, but is that it? He's assuming it's a objective way to map residential streets, main through fares generally don't have traffic calming devices. However that doesn't always hold water here since those ways might be the main shopping area of small towns, so you need to distinguish them from alternative routes as well. I don't think this can be completely tagged in an objective manner like that simply because some streets that are now less important for traffic are still very important for pedestrian traffic and where pedestrians want to drive to before they become pedestrians. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] What's the policy on unsurveyed roads from imagery?
2009/12/27 John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com: In Australia there is this legacy speed limit sign for people with racing licenses that they can drive any speed they wish, everyone else is limited to 100, how exactly do you map that? (and I saw one such sign only the day before yesterday). Umm, actually that one's a bit of an urban myth. The sign (and it's a UN standard sign, not just Australian) means end of local speed limits, back to State/Country default speed limit. The racing licence thing comes from very old rule in NSW where they didn't enforce the limit (for anybody) as long as you were not driving at excessive or dangerous speeds, and no longer applies. Somebody once used the I'm a racing driver, it's not excessive for me excuse and got off. As long as you know the state default speed limit, this is easy to tag. It is exactly the same as a sign with that limit. Stephen ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] What's the policy on unsurveyed roads from imagery?
2009/12/27 Stephen Hope slh...@gmail.com: 2009/12/27 John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com: In Australia there is this legacy speed limit sign for people with racing licenses that they can drive any speed they wish, everyone else is limited to 100, how exactly do you map that? (and I saw one such sign only the day before yesterday). Umm, actually that one's a bit of an urban myth. The sign (and it's a UN standard sign, not just Australian) means end of local speed I was pretty sure it didn't apply any more, the NT was the last to have unlimited speed zones in Australia and 130km/hr has been the max since 2007 I think. At least the end of local speed signs aren't as useless as those End of 50 zone signs. used the I'm a racing driver, it's not excessive for me excuse and got off. H, I guess it would be worth getting a racing license then :) ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] What's the policy on unsurveyed roads from imagery?
On Sun, Dec 27, 2009 at 6:35 PM, Stephen Hope slh...@gmail.com wrote: As long as you know the state default speed limit, this is easy to tag. It is exactly the same as a sign with that limit. If so, just remember to indicate the source as discussed at: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:maxspeed In some areas (e.g. Italy) mappers are mapping implicit maxspeeds like explicit maxspeeds but add source:maxspeed=Countrycode:urban/rural But this is off-topic. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] What's the policy on unsurveyed roads from imagery?
2009/12/27 John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com: In Australia there is this legacy speed limit sign for people with racing licenses that they can drive any speed they wish, everyone else is limited to 100, how exactly do you map that? (and I saw one such sign only the day before yesterday). Umm, actually that one's a bit of an urban myth. The sign (and it's a UN standard sign, not just Australian) means end of local speed limits, back to State/Country default speed limit. The racing licence thing comes from very old rule in NSW where they didn't enforce the limit (for anybody) as long as you were not driving at excessive or dangerous speeds, and no longer applies. Somebody once used the I'm a racing driver, it's not excessive for me excuse and got off. As long as you know the state default speed limit, this is easy to tag. It is exactly the same as a sign with that limit. Except that there is the possibility that the default limit might change in the future. In that case if default limit signs had been tagged with the limit as it was when they were tagged, they'd now all need to be changed. In the UK that sign means national speed limit applies; the national speed limit is different for single carriageways, dual carriageways, and motorways (though I think all motorways are explicitly signed with the relevant speed limit). The national speed limit has changed in the past. -- David James ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] What's the policy on unsurveyed roads from imagery?
On Sun, 27 Dec 2009, Anthony wrote: I suppose all the bicyclists in OSM would disagree with that, but they don't have much use for primary/secondary/tertiary designations either, do they? Of course we do, we want to avoid certain roads ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] What's the policy on unsurveyed roads from imagery?
On Sun, 27 Dec 2009, John Smith wrote: Mind you, I have no idea why these signs still exist, since I don't think there is anywhere in Australia you can legally go faster than 130km/hr these days. Has the NT put a standard speed limit on last? It changes policy with each change in government ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] What's the policy on unsurveyed roads from imagery?
On Sun, Dec 27, 2009 at 5:13 PM, Liz ed...@billiau.net wrote: On Sun, 27 Dec 2009, Anthony wrote: I suppose all the bicyclists in OSM would disagree with that, but they don't have much use for primary/secondary/tertiary designations either, do they? Of course we do, we want to avoid certain roads Which ones, and by what definitions of primary/secondary/tertiary? ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] What's the policy on unsurveyed roads from imagery?
Well, you don't want to ride on an expressway (for safety reasons, and also because doing so is illegal in many cases). However, in addition to the speed of the motorized traffic, you also have factors such as the presence or absence of a dedicated bicycle lane and/or wide shoulders, whether the shoulder is paved, gravel, or just bare earth, the amount of broken glass and other hazardous debris, etc. I don't think that simply categorizing the road as primary/secondary/tertiary is enough. -- John F. Eldredge -- j...@jfeldredge.com Reserve your right to think, for even to think wrongly is better than not to think at all. -- Hypatia of Alexandria -Original Message- From: Anthony o...@inbox.org Date: Sun, 27 Dec 2009 18:08:00 To: Lized...@billiau.net Cc: talk@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] What's the policy on unsurveyed roads from imagery? ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] What's the policy on unsurveyed roads from imagery?
On Mon, 28 Dec 2009, Anthony wrote: On Sun, Dec 27, 2009 at 5:13 PM, Liz ed...@billiau.net wrote: On Sun, 27 Dec 2009, Anthony wrote: I suppose all the bicyclists in OSM would disagree with that, but they don't have much use for primary/secondary/tertiary designations either, do they? Of course we do, we want to avoid certain roads Which ones, and by what definitions of primary/secondary/tertiary? We want to avoid roads with too much traffic. None of these maps are going to check for hills It doesn't matter whose definition of primary/secondary/tertiary because the object is ride on the lower grade roads having sent all the motorised traffic on the higher grade roads :) -- BOFH excuse #258: That's easy to fix, but I can't be bothered. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] What's the policy on unsurveyed roads from imagery?
On Sun, Dec 27, 2009 at 6:25 PM, Elizabeth Dodd ed...@billiau.net wrote: We want to avoid roads with too much traffic. None of these maps are going to check for hills It doesn't matter whose definition of primary/secondary/tertiary because the object is ride on the lower grade roads having sent all the motorised traffic on the higher grade roads :) Obviously with the exception of roads with dedicated bike lanes, which presumably should be mapped separately, but in most cases probably aren't. Okay, I stand corrected. I guess some bicyclists do use primary/secondary/tertiary. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] What's the policy on unsurveyed roads from imagery?
I gather the convention is to mark any unsurveyed road which one has some information as simply highway=road, on the basis that you know nothing else about it. But what about when the information comes from high quality imagery (like nearmap in australia)? I've been mapping these as highway=residential etc, although of course I don't know the name. My question arises from CloudMade highlighting highway=road ways in their OSM downloads, as though that was the definitive way of indicating an incompletely surveyed road. Steve ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] What's the policy on unsurveyed roads from imagery?
2009/12/27 Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com: I gather the convention is to mark any unsurveyed road which one has some information as simply highway=road, on the basis that you know nothing else about it. But what about when the information comes from high quality imagery (like nearmap in australia)? I've been mapping these as highway=residential etc, although of course I don't know the name. I tend to mark these as I think they should, if it looks like residential then I mark it that way, I don't see much point in marking it as a road unless you are unsure of what type of road it is and need someone to check on the ground. I always try to tag the source properly too, if I tag it as source=nearmap then it's obvious that I didn't survey it. My question arises from CloudMade highlighting highway=road ways in their OSM downloads, as though that was the definitive way of indicating an incompletely surveyed road. Same could be said for anything other than roads tagged as source=survey, once you have roads mapped out from imagery you can use the validator plugin in JOSM to display unnamed roads, you can do the same with the maplint feature on the main OSM map page. Any tools such as the one you point out cloudmade have produced isn't gospel, just look at all the people that disagree with the errors keep right claims to exist, when it's just a difference of how something should be mapped and not an error at all. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] What's the policy on unsurveyed roads from imagery?
On Sat, Dec 26, 2009 at 9:10 AM, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote: I gather the convention is to mark any unsurveyed road which one has some information as simply highway=road, on the basis that you know nothing else about it. Looking at the highway tagging guidelines for Australia ( http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Highway), I don't see anything that isn't in aerial imagery, except for the A/B/C designation in states that use that classification. That said, I personally find the highway tagging guidelines difficult to apply anyway. In states without formal legal road classifications we might as well mark everything except motorways and service roads as road for all I can tell. Anything else is just tagging for the renderer. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] What's the policy on unsurveyed roads from imagery?
2009/12/27 Anthony o...@inbox.org: That said, I personally find the highway tagging guidelines difficult to apply anyway. In states without formal legal road classifications we might as well mark everything except motorways and service roads as road for all I can tell. Anything else is just tagging for the renderer. This is another endless OSM debate, in general I look at how used a road is, how urban it is, if it's a main through fare or is the main street in towns and has since had a bunch of roundabouts and humps put in to slow traffic and then take an educated guess as to what to tag a road. It isn't the most objective way to do things, but then it's going to be subjective somewhere, the only difference is if you make the decision or someone in council does. Another way to look at it is if you have similar roads which are the quickest way to go usually. Also it's usually likely that a primary or trunk road won't just dead end, but instead connect or continue as a secondary, and same with secondaries they will usually connect or continue as a tertiary and they will usually connect/continue as a residential or unclassified. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] What's the policy on unsurveyed roads from imagery?
On Sat, Dec 26, 2009 at 9:56 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.comwrote: It isn't the most objective way to do things, but then it's going to be subjective somewhere, the only difference is if you make the decision or someone in council does. I'm perfectly fine with letting the people in council waste their time with subjective categorization and then either 1) copying the results, if they have some sort of legal distinction; or 2) ignoring them altogether, if they don't. Another way to look at it is if you have similar roads which are the quickest way to go usually. I have this insane theory that if the renderers just outright refused to color roads without speed limit tags, these tags would get added a lot quicker. Once you have roads and speed limits, the question of which roads are the quickest way to go usually can be determined by an algorithm. I guess to some extent it's a question of whether or not a street map database without speed limits is good enough. I'd say it is not. At least not in the more heavily populated areas of the world. I suppose all the bicyclists in OSM would disagree with that, but they don't have much use for primary/secondary/tertiary designations either, do they? This is another endless OSM debate, in general I look at how used a road is, how urban it is, if it's a main through fare or is the main street in towns and has since had a bunch of roundabouts and humps put in to slow traffic and then take an educated guess as to what to tag a road. Mapping a road the wrong color when there aren't any traffic_calming tags is another great way to get people adding appropriate tags. Yes, it's an endless debate, so I'll try not to spend too much time on it. I think it is useful to point out the problems every once in a while, though. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] What's the policy on unsurveyed roads from imagery?
2009/12/27 Anthony o...@inbox.org: I have this insane theory that if the renderers just outright refused to color roads without speed limit tags, these tags would get added a lot quicker. Once you have roads and speed limits, the question of which roads are the quickest way to go usually can be determined by an algorithm. In Australia there is this legacy speed limit sign for people with racing licenses that they can drive any speed they wish, everyone else is limited to 100, how exactly do you map that? (and I saw one such sign only the day before yesterday). Also, the average speed you can drive isn't just a function of speed limit, but radius of curves and even hills, but curve radius isn't always mapped accurately and hills aren't mapped at all. So this sort of subjective decision making isn't any better than the subjective suggestions I made. I guess to some extent it's a question of whether or not a street map database without speed limits is good enough. I'd say it is not. At least not in the more heavily populated areas of the world. I suppose all the bicyclists in OSM would disagree with that, but they don't have much use for primary/secondary/tertiary designations either, do they? Dunno about your part of the world, but cyclists still have to obey all road signs here including speed limits. So they too may benefit from speed information, and I'd love nothing more than to have a speed limit for each way, but that just doesn't exist at present and isn't always a good indication of average rate of travel on any particular way. Mapping a road the wrong color when there aren't any traffic_calming tags is another great way to get people adding appropriate tags. I think you'll have an up hill battle on your hands trying to get most others to agree, people have expectations of maps and that includes major through fares being significantly differentiated from residential streets. Yes, it's an endless debate, so I'll try not to spend too much time on it. I think it is useful to point out the problems every once in a while, though. You mean like the problems with your logic as well? :) ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] What's the policy on unsurveyed roads from imagery?
2009/12/27 John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com: In Australia there is this legacy speed limit sign for people with racing licenses that they can drive any speed they wish, everyone else is limited to 100, how exactly do you map that? (and I saw one such sign only the day before yesterday). Sorry, I meant to post a link to an image showing the sign: http://images.drive.com.au/drive_images/Editorial/2006/11/08/8SignM_m.jpg ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] What's the policy on unsurveyed roads from imagery?
On Sat, Dec 26, 2009 at 11:39 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.comwrote: 2009/12/27 John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com: In Australia there is this legacy speed limit sign for people with racing licenses that they can drive any speed they wish, everyone else is limited to 100, how exactly do you map that? (and I saw one such sign only the day before yesterday). Sorry, I meant to post a link to an image showing the sign: http://images.drive.com.au/drive_images/Editorial/2006/11/08/8SignM_m.jpg Are you asking me to suggest a tag? How about speed=derestricted? ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] What's the policy on unsurveyed roads from imagery?
On Sun, Dec 27, 2009 at 2:08 AM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote: I'm perfectly fine with letting the people in council waste their time with subjective categorization and then either 1) copying the results, if they have some sort of legal distinction; or 2) ignoring them altogether, if they don't. If you're not comfortable with choosing a highway value, then just using highway=road is a great idea - i.e. let those who are comfortable sort it out later. Recently, I've taken this approach also when tracing pathways - I just use highway=path now (plus surface=*). I'm OVER the cycleway/footway thing for now... :) I have this insane theory that if the renderers just outright refused to color roads without speed limit tags, these tags would get added a lot quicker. Once you have roads and speed limits, the question of which roads are the quickest way to go usually can be determined by an algorithm. Yeah - but hey, if you want maxspeeds to be entered, just go and do it. I think it is useful to point out the problems every once in a while, though. Yup! ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] What's the policy on unsurveyed roads from imagery?
2009/12/27 Anthony o...@inbox.org: On Sat, Dec 26, 2009 at 11:39 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: 2009/12/27 John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com: In Australia there is this legacy speed limit sign for people with racing licenses that they can drive any speed they wish, everyone else is limited to 100, how exactly do you map that? (and I saw one such sign only the day before yesterday). Sorry, I meant to post a link to an image showing the sign: http://images.drive.com.au/drive_images/Editorial/2006/11/08/8SignM_m.jpg Are you asking me to suggest a tag? How about speed=derestricted? Was a question to anyone in general, I haven't been able to come up with anything reasonable. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] What's the policy on unsurveyed roads from imagery?
2009/12/27 John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com: 2009/12/27 Anthony o...@inbox.org: On Sat, Dec 26, 2009 at 11:39 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: 2009/12/27 John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com: In Australia there is this legacy speed limit sign for people with racing licenses that they can drive any speed they wish, everyone else is limited to 100, how exactly do you map that? (and I saw one such sign only the day before yesterday). Sorry, I meant to post a link to an image showing the sign: http://images.drive.com.au/drive_images/Editorial/2006/11/08/8SignM_m.jpg Are you asking me to suggest a tag? How about speed=derestricted? Was a question to anyone in general, I haven't been able to come up with anything reasonable. Mind you, I have no idea why these signs still exist, since I don't think there is anywhere in Australia you can legally go faster than 130km/hr these days. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
