Re: [OSM-talk] trunk_link ref=*
In the uk they do - visible on the driver location signs - seams to be a bit random as to which road gets them though - at the a50/a500 junction the latter gets all of them iirc Can't remember seeing them at the later a500/m6 junction though or the m6/m65 one On 9/25/09, Cartinus carti...@xs4all.nl wrote: On Thursday 24 September 2009 00:16:14 Dave F. wrote: I've trunk_link going form one trunk to another. They have different references. Do I add a ref=*. If so which one? The one it's leaving or the one it's going to? The others responded to the second question. But I think the first question is a lot more important. We (should) map what is there. So the real question is: Do sliproads between trunk roads actually have a ref in the real world? If I'm not mistaken, then they don't have one around here (the Netherlands). -- m.v.g., Cartinus ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk -- Sent from my mobile device ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] trunk_link ref=*
Cartinus wrote: We (should) map what is there. So the real question is: Do sliproads between trunk roads actually have a ref in the real world? If I'm not mistaken, then they don't have one around here (the Netherlands). They do, at least between motorways. They are usually numbered the same as one of the motorways they connect to, followed by a letter. One of the reasons being that if something happens there, you don't have to explain emergency services where you came from and where you were going, but can just tell them the ref on the nearest marker. Say where the motorway has ref=A16, the motorway_link may be numbered ref=A16f. In Belgium, they can have refs too, but they seem to be a longer (internal?) version of the numbering scheme. For example, a motorway_link onto the R1 can have a ref of R001.427. Personally, I don't think these should be rendered on the main maps, and they should not be made up by us if there is no real ref on the ground. -- Lennard ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] trunk_link ref=*
Thanks to all for your replies. Lennard wrote: Personally, I don't think these should be rendered on the main maps, osmarender:renderRef is a tag to prevent rendering. and they should not be made up by us if there is no real ref on the ground. Would they not be essential for routing software? Cheers Dave F. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] trunk_link ref=*
Dave F. wrote: Would they not be essential for routing software? Routing software by its nature will preprocess the OSM data: you'd be insane to route over raw OSM data (though I'm sure someone's doing it). Gosmore, for example, preprocesses it into .pak files. As part of that, the routing software can add whatever road number it sees fit. It's not a Hard Problem. If, say, you have a motorway slip road that leads to a roundabout, and the A46 and the A429 converge at that roundabout, a router might choose to add a hint of the A46/A429 to its internal representation of the slip road. As ever, optimise for the mapper, not the client. cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/trunk_link---ref%3D*-tp25586162p25610176.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] trunk_link ref=*
Dave F. wrote: Personally, I don't think these should be rendered on the main maps, osmarender:renderRef is a tag to prevent rendering. I said 'maps', plural. One renderer's trick of not showing certain features is certainly the wrong approach to this. and they should not be made up by us if there is no real ref on the ground. Would they not be essential for routing software? Why would you think that made up refs would be? Why would you even think that refs would be essential at all for routing? The only thing they are good for in the router is to give the driver better instructions. Take the next exit, and follow the A29 Now, if I'm on currently not on the A29, and I get this instruction, what is unclear about that? I see an exit coming up, probably even reinforced with signs pointing out that that is the direction to take for the A29. Clear and to the point. Take the next exit, follow the slip road A58-A29*, then follow the A29. Exactly how would this be better? A58-A29 won't be on signs, and it tells me non-essential information that could confuse me. * Assuming this is what we in OSM made up as a ref. -- Lennard ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] trunk_link ref=*
On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 12:21 PM, Lennard l...@xs4all.nl wrote: Dave F. wrote: Personally, I don't think these should be rendered on the main maps, osmarender:renderRef is a tag to prevent rendering. I said 'maps', plural. One renderer's trick of not showing certain features is certainly the wrong approach to this. and they should not be made up by us if there is no real ref on the ground. Would they not be essential for routing software? Why would you think that made up refs would be? Why would you even think that refs would be essential at all for routing? The only thing they are good for in the router is to give the driver better instructions. Take the next exit, and follow the A29 Now, if I'm on currently not on the A29, and I get this instruction, what is unclear about that? I see an exit coming up, probably even reinforced with signs pointing out that that is the direction to take for the A29. Clear and to the point. Take the next exit, follow the slip road A58-A29*, then follow the A29. Exactly how would this be better? A58-A29 won't be on signs, and it tells me non-essential information that could confuse me. Plus it's actually wrong. You'd hope, as Richard said, that the router had more local knowledge than that and could happily work out how a slip road between blahX and blahY should be referred to if it doesn't have a ref. If it does have a ref then the router is likely to assume you knew better (ie: as was also mentioned earlier the slip roads have specific refs), and if you didn't know better then it's just pointless bad data ruining a perfectly good router. Dave ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] trunk_link ref=*
I'd say the one it's going to. Though I have no special arguments to why. Konrad torsdagen den 24 september 2009 02.28.00 skrev talk- requ...@openstreetmap.org: Hi I've trunk_link going form one trunk to another. They have different references. Do I add a ref=*. If so which one? The one it's leaving or the one it's going to? Cheers Dave F. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] trunk_link ref=*
On Thursday 24 September 2009 00:16:14 Dave F. wrote: I've trunk_link going form one trunk to another. They have different references. Do I add a ref=*. If so which one? The one it's leaving or the one it's going to? The others responded to the second question. But I think the first question is a lot more important. We (should) map what is there. So the real question is: Do sliproads between trunk roads actually have a ref in the real world? If I'm not mistaken, then they don't have one around here (the Netherlands). -- m.v.g., Cartinus ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] trunk_link ref=*
Hi I've trunk_link going form one trunk to another. They have different references. Do I add a ref=*. If so which one? The one it's leaving or the one it's going to? Cheers Dave F. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] trunk_link ref=*
On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 11:16:14PM +0100, Dave F. wrote: Hi I've trunk_link going form one trunk to another. They have different references. Do I add a ref=*. If so which one? The one it's leaving or the one it's going to? Just a thought i had on this - Typically you'll have 2 trunk links, each with a one way on them. My thought was to put the other ref on it - So when you go from trunk ref=a to trunk ref=b via trunk_link 1 you'll put ref=b on it - On the other trunk link you'll you from trunk b to a you add ref=a to it. The idea behind it is that the navigation software will tell you Keep right to trunk ref b Not - Keep right and continue on ref a and later a Join trunk ref b When leaving the trunk with a ref a (on a trunk_link) you are heading towards a new trunk so you put the new ref on it ... Flo -- Florian Lohoff f...@rfc822.org Es ist ein grobes Missverständnis und eine Fehlwahrnehmung, dem Staat im Internet Zensur- und Überwachungsabsichten zu unterstellen. - - Bundesminister Dr. Wolfgang Schäuble -- 10. Juli in Berlin signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
