Re: [talk-au] 4WD only tags
Hello Li what happens when a track is tagged with 4wd_only=yes and grade=6? Technically I'd see no issue having both those key combos present. In practice not good in that one must be wrong but that won't upset OSM. In the mainstream maps, the way should be rendered according to grade6. The renderers already recognise tracktype so its relatively easy to extend to grades 6, 7 and 8. The renderers don't observe 4wd_only and sadly probably won't. But other applications will still be free to note one or the other of course. How they cope if they actually observe both and note the conflict I guess is up to the app it self. David On Tue, 2012-11-06 at 23:32 +1100, Li Xia wrote: Hi David, Just scanned your personal page quickly while i had spare time so sorry up front if i missed anything. A quick comment on the proposed grading. According to your proposal of tagging grades 6-8, what happens when a track is tagged with 4wd_only=yes and grade=6? Li. On 06/11/2012, at 2:23 PM, David Bannon wrote: OK Li, you ask and you shall receive ! Here http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Davo#Draft_4x4_road_proposal is my very early draft. You and everyone else is welcome to get stuck into it, I am not thin skinned ! The OSM proposal page says to to be verbose, no one need tell me to be verbose ! So if its too long, please indicate what needs removing. And obviously, error and omissions I am quite unhappy that it really ends up undercutting the 4wd_only tag, they can coexist but I wonder if they will if this is successful. Its a shame really, I like 4wd_only and have used it but as I developed my arguments it became clear to me that we need a finer grain and its probably easier to add levels to tracktype than it is to 4wd_only. And it will be easier to get these levels rendered if we go for tracktype. David David On Mon, 2012-11-05 at 17:28 +1100, Li Xia wrote: No probs david, and you'll be getting plenty of input from me, watch out ;-) A draft would be great. Let me know when it's ready to review. Li. On 05/11/2012, at 9:10 AM, David Bannon wrote: Thanks Li, I have not put that proposal up yet, waiting on a response to a related matter. Soon. And when I do, I'll not be wanting just your vote, it will be your input I will really need ! Maybe I should put a draft up on my personal page while we wait ? David - Original Message - From: Li Xia lisxia1...@gmail.com To: David Bannon dban...@internode.on.net Cc: OSM Australian Talk List talk-au@openstreetmap.org Sent: Sun, 4 Nov 2012 20:37:52 +1100 Subject: Re: 4WD only tags Hi David, although my opinion is that most render's try to simplify the the stylesheet so the map for ease of comprehension and would not make use of these additional attributes, I see your point and agree that it's useful data to have. Since my company focuses on 4WD maps and navigation, we will certainly take full advantage of this. BTW, do you have the link to the proposal page? Will go and cast a vote. Li. On 04/11/2012, at 2:41 PM, David Bannon wrote: Li, I beg to differ. While I agree that grading of a 4x4 track is subjective, so is much of the other data in the OSM database. Must be that way. The real issue is how important the data is. As I have mentioned, I am concerned that maps are being rendered that ignore this data. Routing engines are potentially sending people down roads that they, and their vehicles are ill suited to. Bad things will definitely happen. The routing people are saying but these tags don't even show on the OSM maps, why should we worry ?. And as to subjective, while there will always be borderline cases, I don't think it would be too hard to divide tracks up into - * 4x4 recommended - you will might be OK in a conventional car or (better still) an SUV but you have been warned. * 4x4 required - you really need a stock 4x4, a real one with (eg) low ratio. * 4x4 extreme - this is for the death or glory boys, they need experience and modified vehicles. This is a recent addition ! I am pretty sure that if you and I spent a couple of weeks having some driving fun, we'd agree on the vast majority of the tracks we graded. David
Re: [talk-au] 4WD only tags
Hi David, Here is an example of why the grading combined with 4WD_only tags may not work in conjunction in rendering. let's say all 4WD tracks are rendered using dotted lines (very common on raster maps and widely adopted). What happens when it already 4wd_only=yes but it's also tagged as grade 6? Which tag should take priority? Isn't 4wd_only=yes and 4WD recommended some what contradicting? Li. On 07/11/2012, at 8:20 PM, David Bannon wrote: Hello Li what happens when a track is tagged with 4wd_only=yes and grade=6? Technically I'd see no issue having both those key combos present. In practice not good in that one must be wrong but that won't upset OSM. In the mainstream maps, the way should be rendered according to grade6. The renderers already recognise tracktype so its relatively easy to extend to grades 6, 7 and 8. The renderers don't observe 4wd_only and sadly probably won't. But other applications will still be free to note one or the other of course. How they cope if they actually observe both and note the conflict I guess is up to the app it self. David On Tue, 2012-11-06 at 23:32 +1100, Li Xia wrote: Hi David, Just scanned your personal page quickly while i had spare time so sorry up front if i missed anything. A quick comment on the proposed grading. According to your proposal of tagging grades 6-8, what happens when a track is tagged with 4wd_only=yes and grade=6? Li. On 06/11/2012, at 2:23 PM, David Bannon wrote: OK Li, you ask and you shall receive ! Here http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Davo#Draft_4x4_road_proposal is my very early draft. You and everyone else is welcome to get stuck into it, I am not thin skinned ! The OSM proposal page says to to be verbose, no one need tell me to be verbose ! So if its too long, please indicate what needs removing. And obviously, error and omissions I am quite unhappy that it really ends up undercutting the 4wd_only tag, they can coexist but I wonder if they will if this is successful. Its a shame really, I like 4wd_only and have used it but as I developed my arguments it became clear to me that we need a finer grain and its probably easier to add levels to tracktype than it is to 4wd_only. And it will be easier to get these levels rendered if we go for tracktype. David David On Mon, 2012-11-05 at 17:28 +1100, Li Xia wrote: No probs david, and you'll be getting plenty of input from me, watch out ;-) A draft would be great. Let me know when it's ready to review. Li. On 05/11/2012, at 9:10 AM, David Bannon wrote: Thanks Li, I have not put that proposal up yet, waiting on a response to a related matter. Soon. And when I do, I'll not be wanting just your vote, it will be your input I will really need ! Maybe I should put a draft up on my personal page while we wait ? David - Original Message - From: Li Xia lisxia1...@gmail.com To: David Bannon dban...@internode.on.net Cc: OSM Australian Talk List talk-au@openstreetmap.org Sent: Sun, 4 Nov 2012 20:37:52 +1100 Subject: Re: 4WD only tags Hi David, although my opinion is that most render's try to simplify the the stylesheet so the map for ease of comprehension and would not make use of these additional attributes, I see your point and agree that it's useful data to have. Since my company focuses on 4WD maps and navigation, we will certainly take full advantage of this. BTW, do you have the link to the proposal page? Will go and cast a vote. Li. On 04/11/2012, at 2:41 PM, David Bannon wrote: Li, I beg to differ. While I agree that grading of a 4x4 track is subjective, so is much of the other data in the OSM database. Must be that way. The real issue is how important the data is. As I have mentioned, I am concerned that maps are being rendered that ignore this data. Routing engines are potentially sending people down roads that they, and their vehicles are ill suited to. Bad things will definitely happen. The routing people are saying but these tags don't even show on the OSM maps, why should we worry ?. And as to subjective, while there will always be borderline cases, I don't think it would be too hard to divide tracks up into - * 4x4 recommended - you will might be OK in a conventional car or (better still) an SUV but you have been warned. * 4x4 required - you really need a stock 4x4, a real one with (eg) low ratio. * 4x4 extreme - this is for the death or glory boys, they
Re: [talk-au] 4WD only tags
Hi Li, I still don't see a problem. Firstly, I am not aware of any publicly visible map that uses the 4wd_Only tag. Maybe I am wrong, can you point me to one ? But even if there is, and it renderes as you say, then its still OK really. We'd see a dotted line and 4wd Recommended appended to the name. Like the rest of the OSM database, incorrect date entered will give incorrect results. I'd like to see all grade5, grade6, grade7 and grade8 roads rendered as a single or double dotted line, Some, depending on their highway= tag may have a coloured fill. The 6, 7 and 8 have text appended to the name, 5 does not. In your example, grade6 will have 4wd Recommended) appended but we know its also got 4wd_Only=yes set. Well thats wrong but its wrong because the wrong tags have been stored in the database. If someone spots it, maybe they will fix it and all will be good. Even if it does not get fixed, people will still be alerted to the fact that it might be a road needing thinking about. Thats better that what we have now were the mainstream renderers ignore 4wd_only and we don't have a tracktype higher than grade5. David On Wed, 2012-11-07 at 21:49 +1100, Li Xia wrote: Hi David, Here is an example of why the grading combined with 4WD_only tags may not work in conjunction in rendering. let's say all 4WD tracks are rendered using dotted lines (very common on raster maps and widely adopted). What happens when it already 4wd_only=yes but it's also tagged as grade 6? Which tag should take priority? Isn't 4wd_only=yes and 4WD recommended some what contradicting? Li. On 07/11/2012, at 8:20 PM, David Bannon wrote: Hello Li what happens when a track is tagged with 4wd_only=yes and grade=6? Technically I'd see no issue having both those key combos present. In practice not good in that one must be wrong but that won't upset OSM. In the mainstream maps, the way should be rendered according to grade6. The renderers already recognise tracktype so its relatively easy to extend to grades 6, 7 and 8. The renderers don't observe 4wd_only and sadly probably won't. But other applications will still be free to note one or the other of course. How they cope if they actually observe both and note the conflict I guess is up to the app it self. David On Tue, 2012-11-06 at 23:32 +1100, Li Xia wrote: Hi David, Just scanned your personal page quickly while i had spare time so sorry up front if i missed anything. A quick comment on the proposed grading. According to your proposal of tagging grades 6-8, what happens when a track is tagged with 4wd_only=yes and grade=6? Li. On 06/11/2012, at 2:23 PM, David Bannon wrote: OK Li, you ask and you shall receive ! Here http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Davo#Draft_4x4_road_proposal is my very early draft. You and everyone else is welcome to get stuck into it, I am not thin skinned ! The OSM proposal page says to to be verbose, no one need tell me to be verbose ! So if its too long, please indicate what needs removing. And obviously, error and omissions I am quite unhappy that it really ends up undercutting the 4wd_only tag, they can coexist but I wonder if they will if this is successful. Its a shame really, I like 4wd_only and have used it but as I developed my arguments it became clear to me that we need a finer grain and its probably easier to add levels to tracktype than it is to 4wd_only. And it will be easier to get these levels rendered if we go for tracktype. David David On Mon, 2012-11-05 at 17:28 +1100, Li Xia wrote: No probs david, and you'll be getting plenty of input from me, watch out ;-) A draft would be great. Let me know when it's ready to review. Li. On 05/11/2012, at 9:10 AM, David Bannon wrote: Thanks Li, I have not put that proposal up yet, waiting on a response to a related matter. Soon. And when I do, I'll not be wanting just your vote, it will be your input I will really need ! Maybe I should put a draft up on my personal page while we wait ? David - Original Message - From: Li Xia lisxia1...@gmail.com To: David Bannon dban...@internode.on.net Cc: OSM Australian Talk List talk-au@openstreetmap.org Sent: Sun, 4 Nov 2012 20:37:52 +1100 Subject: Re: 4WD only tags Hi David, although my opinion is that most render's try to simplify the the stylesheet so the map for ease of comprehension and would not make use of these additional attributes, I see your point and agree that it's useful data to have. Since my company focuses on 4WD maps and navigation, we will certainly take full advantage of this. BTW, do you have the link to the proposal page? Will go and
Re: [talk-au] traffic lights on dual carriageway intersections
So, Ian Sergeant has presented reasoning why we should not pursue more complicated schemes for applying traffic lights to intersections of dual carriageways - fair enough. This brings me back to the incident that triggered me to start this thread: there are several intersections of dual carriageways in Perth CBD where only 1 of the 4 nodes are marked with traffic lights, and this struck me as wrong, and hence I asked what was the correct and accepted method. If we are to reject the more complex solution of adding traffic lights one node back from the interesting nodes (as implemented in Melbourne CBD, and reasoned against by Ian), surely we should be marking all 4 intersection nodes as having traffic lights ?? (not just one). what does everyone think ? Ian Steer ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] scenic routes
Hi all, I have an angle for updating OSM. I want to find a file of all scenic drives. The ones sign posted with brown signs that you see when driving. For all my Googling, I can't seem to find a map or a file of these. It would be good to tag all such roads in OSM so it's easy to plan scenic trips. I want to do this so I can discover more nice parts of Queensland. Wil ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] traffic lights on dual carriageway intersections
On 07/11/12 23:21, Steer wrote: So, Ian Sergeant has presented reasoning why we should not pursue more complicated schemes for applying traffic lights to intersections of dual carriageways -- fair enough. That is not quite what I said. I'd be happy to see a more detailed schema that is expressive enough to indicate where the stop line is, the physical location of the signals, which signals are in sync, how many signals on a journey, etc. The current one tag/independent node system means that you need to make a choice in what you can represent. Since I can't see a way to generally and accurately represent traffic light count in the current schema, I think that is the wrong choice to represent just on dual carriageways. I think a relation that links these nodes is probably inevitable. Ian. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] scenic routes
Yep, good idea Wil. I don't see anything obvious in Map Features, http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Map_Features you really have two choices, define your own or start a campaign to define a suitable key. First is easier, second will do a heap better job as if most people do it the same way, its going to be easier to find entries. If you go for the roll your own solution, do doc it in the Australian page so local people can at least follow you example. I think its something you add to a road, so maybe its - highway=* tourism=scenic_route . However, most of the things defined under tourism http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:tourism are really POI like, does that mean they should not be applied to a linear thing ? David On Wed, 2012-11-07 at 23:32 +1030, wil ly wrote: Hi all, I have an angle for updating OSM. I want to find a file of all scenic drives. The ones sign posted with brown signs that you see when driving. For all my Googling, I can't seem to find a map or a file of these. It would be good to tag all such roads in OSM so it's easy to plan scenic trips. I want to do this so I can discover more nice parts of Queensland. Wil ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] scenic routes
Traditionally, I've seen these mapped as route relations type=route route=road network=T ref=number Where they are numbered tourist routes. There are a fair few of them around, and this is documented on AU tagging guidelines page, I think.. Ian. On 8 November 2012 08:47, David Bannon dban...@internode.on.net wrote: Yep, good idea Wil. I don't see anything obvious in Map Features, http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Map_Features you really have two choices, define your own or start a campaign to define a suitable key. First is easier, second will do a heap better job as if most people do it the same way, its going to be easier to find entries. If you go for the roll your own solution, do doc it in the Australian page so local people can at least follow you example. I think its something you add to a road, so maybe its - highway=* tourism=scenic_route . However, most of the things defined under tourism http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:tourism are really POI like, does that mean they should not be applied to a linear thing ? David On Wed, 2012-11-07 at 23:32 +1030, wil ly wrote: Hi all, I have an angle for updating OSM. I want to find a file of all scenic drives. The ones sign posted with brown signs that you see when driving. For all my Googling, I can't seem to find a map or a file of these. It would be good to tag all such roads in OSM so it's easy to plan scenic trips. I want to do this so I can discover more nice parts of Queensland. Wil ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] scenic routes
Agreed. What Ian says. Use a route relation. - Ben. On Nov 8, 2012 9:18 AM, Ian Sergeant inas66+...@gmail.com wrote: Traditionally, I've seen these mapped as route relations type=route route=road network=T ref=number Where they are numbered tourist routes. There are a fair few of them around, and this is documented on AU tagging guidelines page, I think.. Ian. On 8 November 2012 08:47, David Bannon dban...@internode.on.net wrote: Yep, good idea Wil. I don't see anything obvious in Map Features, http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Map_Features you really have two choices, define your own or start a campaign to define a suitable key. First is easier, second will do a heap better job as if most people do it the same way, its going to be easier to find entries. If you go for the roll your own solution, do doc it in the Australian page so local people can at least follow you example. I think its something you add to a road, so maybe its - highway=* tourism=scenic_route . However, most of the things defined under tourism http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:tourism are really POI like, does that mean they should not be applied to a linear thing ? David On Wed, 2012-11-07 at 23:32 +1030, wil ly wrote: Hi all, I have an angle for updating OSM. I want to find a file of all scenic drives. The ones sign posted with brown signs that you see when driving. For all my Googling, I can't seem to find a map or a file of these. It would be good to tag all such roads in OSM so it's easy to plan scenic trips. I want to do this so I can discover more nice parts of Queensland. Wil ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] scenic routes
Ian, I don't think it (route relations for eg scenic routes) is doc'ed on http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines Or not that I can find. Sounds like a good approach, should it be on the above page so people can be suitably inspired ? David On Thu, 2012-11-08 at 09:17 +1100, Ian Sergeant wrote: Traditionally, I've seen these mapped as route relations type=route route=road network=T ref=number Where they are numbered tourist routes. There are a fair few of them around, and this is documented on AU tagging guidelines page, I think.. Ian. On 8 November 2012 08:47, David Bannon dban...@internode.on.net wrote: Yep, good idea Wil. I don't see anything obvious in Map Features, http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Map_Features you really have two choices, define your own or start a campaign to define a suitable key. First is easier, second will do a heap better job as if most people do it the same way, its going to be easier to find entries. If you go for the roll your own solution, do doc it in the Australian page so local people can at least follow you example. I think its something you add to a road, so maybe its - highway=* tourism=scenic_route . However, most of the things defined under tourism http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:tourism are really POI like, does that mean they should not be applied to a linear thing ? David On Wed, 2012-11-07 at 23:32 +1030, wil ly wrote: Hi all, I have an angle for updating OSM. I want to find a file of all scenic drives. The ones sign posted with brown signs that you see when driving. For all my Googling, I can't seem to find a map or a file of these. It would be good to tag all such roads in OSM so it's easy to plan scenic trips. I want to do this so I can discover more nice parts of Queensland. Wil ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] scenic routes
I guess for copyright reasons you would actually need to go and read the street signs instead of tagging out of a copyrighted book or file? Russell On 2012-11-08 00:02, wil ly wrote: Hi all, I have an angle for updating OSM. I want to find a file of all scenic drives. The ones sign posted with brown signs that you see when driving. For all my Googling, I can't seem to find a map or a file of these. It would be good to tag all such roads in OSM so it's easy to plan scenic trips. I want to do this so I can discover more nice parts of Queensland. Wil ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] scenic routes
On 8 November 2012 11:06, David Bannon dban...@internode.on.net wrote: Ian, I don't think it (route relations for eg scenic routes) is doc'ed on http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines Or not that I can find. Sounds like a good approach, should it be on the above page so people can be suitably inspired ? It was on that page, hidden under non-alphanumeric highway shields. I've given it its own heading for added prominence, but feel free to do whatever you can to make it findable. Ian. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] scenic routes
Hi guys, I have discovered, finally, a couple of resources for tourist drives (as indicated by numbered brown signs). 1. DERM's physical roads dataset dated 28/9/2010 has a TOURNUM field, but this only seems to contain a few tourist drives: 1, 5, 8, 9, 10, 16, 22, 23, 42, 43, 99, LA and z (the last two I suspect are not named correctly). 2. RACQ's trip planner: http://www.racq.com.au/travel/drive_travel/trip_planner#directions:route/Kuranda/Mareeba/Tolga/Malanda-Atherton_Road_East_Barron_/Yungaburra/Malanda/Millaa_Millaa/PALMERSTON,_QUEENSLAND/Innisfail This has a button top left (right most button) to toggle tourist drives. I am not sure if these are official tourist drives (are there such things - does the government decide on them, and what level of government?), but it's a start. I'm just wondering if there's an automated method to extract these features from their web map. I sent RACQ an email asking for the data, who knows how that will go. Still looking for a definitive source of tourist drive dataset. Let me know if you find anything. Wil On 8 November 2012 13:12, Ian Sergeant inas66+...@gmail.com wrote: On 8 November 2012 11:06, David Bannon dban...@internode.on.net wrote: Ian, I don't think it (route relations for eg scenic routes) is doc'ed on http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines Or not that I can find. Sounds like a good approach, should it be on the above page so people can be suitably inspired ? It was on that page, hidden under non-alphanumeric highway shields. I've given it its own heading for added prominence, but feel free to do whatever you can to make it findable. Ian. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
