Re: [talk-au] Mapping shared driveways
I don't think we are going to have a single rule that always applies, but: generally a shared driveway - will break the highway=* gutter with a kerb ramp - usually won't have a kerb - usually on private land - usually maintained by the owners - letter boxes and garbage bins usually need to be taken out to the street and not along the shared driveway - not part of the public road network > ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Mapping shared driveways
Hey Matthew, I think the distinction is inherited from the distinction between highway=service and highway=residential. A "regular" driveway shouldn't be a residential road, and a narrow, but otherwise unremarkable residential road doesn't become a service road. I do feel as though there is some overlap between highway=residential and highway=service as they are used. I've seen some residential roads tagged as service roads because they are "less important" or narrower than surrounding roads; possibly in order to affect the rendering. If a residential road is narrow enough though, it can be tagged as alley. If I had to try and define the difference, it'd probably be based on whether the road is accessing a "single property" or not. The wiki definition of "highway=service" is for access roads to a building, servo, beach, campsite, industrial estate, business park, etc. This would suggest that it is appropriate for roads that access a large property with multiple tenants, which could be analogous to a subdivided parcel of land with multiple units. Having a street name should generally be the giveaway, some googling also suggests that the lack of footpaths, streetlights, etc are other common features. Ultimately though it's subjective, and Seb's examples are probably three perfect examples of edge cases. Example 1 (818426144): Agree that highway=residential is not appropriate here. It looks like a driveway from the road functions, but the actual properties seem to access from shared driveways branched off of the main way: personally I'd say highway=service with five pups gems branching off, but I wouldn't "correct" the main branch if it had been tagged as a pipe stem as well. It does happen to be very long, though: if it was given a gazetted name, with each house getting renumbered accordingly, I think residential would be a justifiable alternative. The way north of this (181739516) is an example of just that: the mapper has gone with a plain highway=service, but residential would have been my first choice. The second example, Tilbavale Close, doesn't look like a driveway, has individually numbered properties, and (for lack of a more scientific word) doesn't "feel" like a driveway. It's a narrow residential street. The funny spurs coming off the Close (184844140), even though they are part of the gazetted roadway, do look like shared driveways. The last example (Cassugan Court) looks like like a driveway from the road, but someone has gone and gazetted a name and numbered the properties with it. Each property does have their own driveway branching off of it, though, so I'd say this looks like the most "driveway-ish" a road could be while still being highway=residential. If I came across this with a plain highway=service tag though, I'm not sure I'd correct it. It might be easier to define a pipe stem/shared driveway by what it isn't: it isn't a through road, it isn't any narrow residential road, it isn't any "short" residential road, etc… Dian On 2022-03-16 11:17, Matthew Seale wrote: So what then distinguishes highway=residential from a shared driveway in Sebastian's 3 examples? * The first way 818426144 is an unnamed shared service road, so seems to neatly fit the pipestem example as explained. The addresses in this style of development are likely to be unit numbers, otherwise sharing a shared main road street addresss. * The second way 184844142 and the third way 429541974 are named roads that appear as named roads on the JOSM Vicmap road network layer. The addresses in these instances will most likely use that street name as their address, not the next main road they connect to. So these don't appear to neatly fit the concept of a shared driveway to my thinking. Otherwise taken to it's extreme interpretation there would be a large number of highway=residential that, due to being in privately developed areas, could be change to pipestem. I don't think that is the intent. Thoughts? Matthew On Wed, Mar 16, 2022 at 9:42 AM Dian Ågesson wrote: Interesting discussion; it does seem like the consensus is landing on the side of service=pipestem. There are 668 instances of driveway=pipestem in Australia: https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1gU6, but there is 0 instances of service=pipestem: https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1gUd. However, it seems as though I have had a disproportionate influence (509 of driveway=pipestem were last edited by me https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1gUf) I don't have a strong preference either way, so I'm happy to move over to the service=pipestem structure (possibly through bulk edit?) Dian On 2022-03-16 08:53, Andrew Harvey wrote: In the global community it's still disputed, see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Tag:service%3Ddriveway#Pipestems and my proposal to have this as an editor preset https://github.com/openstreetmap/id-tagging-schema/pull/239 where the tagging question is still not re
Re: [talk-au] Mapping shared driveways
So what then distinguishes highway=residential from a shared driveway in Sebastian's 3 examples? * The first way 818426144 is an unnamed shared service road, so seems to neatly fit the pipestem example as explained. The addresses in this style of development are likely to be unit numbers, otherwise sharing a shared main road street addresss. * The second way 184844142 and the third way 429541974 are named roads that appear as named roads on the JOSM Vicmap road network layer. The addresses in these instances will most likely use that street name as their address, not the next main road they connect to. So these don't appear to neatly fit the concept of a shared driveway to my thinking. Otherwise taken to it's extreme interpretation there would be a large number of highway=residential that, due to being in privately developed areas, could be change to pipestem. I don't think that is the intent. Thoughts? Matthew On Wed, Mar 16, 2022 at 9:42 AM Dian Ågesson wrote: > Interesting discussion; it does seem like the consensus is landing on the > side of service=pipestem. > > There are 668 instances of driveway=pipestem in Australia: > https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1gU6, but there is 0 instances of > service=pipestem: https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1gUd. However, it seems as > though I have had a disproportionate influence (509 of driveway=pipestem > were last edited by me https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1gUf) > > I don't have a strong preference either way, so I'm happy to move over to > the service=pipestem structure (possibly through bulk edit?) > > Dian > > On 2022-03-16 08:53, Andrew Harvey wrote: > > In the global community it's still disputed, see > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Tag:service%3Ddriveway#Pipestems > and my proposal to have this as an editor preset > https://github.com/openstreetmap/id-tagging-schema/pull/239 where the > tagging question is still not resolved. > > I've actually come around to the idea that service=pipstem is better, > rational being that service=driveway is very clearly defined on the wiki as > a non-shared driveway leading to a single residence. I think it's best we > leave that intact and have a sibling tag service=pipestem for shared > driveways. Otherwise you'll need to redefine service=driveway to be any > type of shared or non-shared driveway and add a new tag driveway=single to > most existing highway=service. > > On Wed, 16 Mar 2022 at 08:10, Tom Brennan wrote: > > I think I started the last discussion on this, so I'll wade in! > Driveways are a bit of a nightmare - there are lots that don't fit > neatly into one bucket or another. > > We did agree that service=driveway, driveway=pipestem was better than > service=pipestem. > > It's probably 6 of one, half a dozen of the other as to whether the ones > below are all shared driveways. Some could equally be classified as > private residential roads. > > But they could all do with a clean up, one way or the other! > > cheers > Tom > > Canyoning? try http://ozultimate.com/canyoning > Bushwalking? try http://bushwalkingnsw.com > > On 15/03/2022 9:22 pm, Dian Ågesson wrote: > > > > > > Hi Seb! > > > > The last time this came up on the mailing list > > ( > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/2021-September/015014.html) > > > most people seemed to approve of the following mapping: > > > > highway=service > > > > service=driveway > > > > driveway=pipestem > > > > Dian > > > > On 2022-03-15 20:16, Sebastian Azagra via Talk-au wrote: > > > >> Hi all, > >> > >> Had a query regarding the mapping of driveways / shared driveways as > >> there seems to be quite a number of different approaches in the data. > >> Below are three examples of similar ways that have different tags used > >> in each instance. > >> > >> Highway=service > >> Service= driveway > >> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/818426144 > >> > >> Highway=Residential > >> Service= driveway > >> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/184844142#map=18/-38.00126/145.27585 > >> > >> Highway=residential > >> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/429541974 > >> > >> Reading the OSM wiki, none of these ways are correctly mapped as they > >> are all shared driveways that leads from a road. my understanding that > >> they need to be tagged as follows: > >> > >> Highway=service > >> Service= Pipestem > >> > >> Would be interested in knowing your thoughts. > >> > >> regards, > >> > >> Sebastian > >> ___ > >> Talk-au mailing list > >> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org > >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au > > > > ___ > > Talk-au mailing list > > Talk-au@openstreetmap.org > > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au > > ___ > Talk-au mailing list > Talk-au@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au > > > ___ > Talk-au mailing list > Talk-au@openstr
Re: [talk-au] Help with bikeways on roads please
Yes, as someone very involved with bicycle routing (and infrastructure), thank you for noting the distinction that bicycle infrastructure tagging is ONE thing (and important) and bicycle route tagging (inclusion of usually the latter elements in a route relation) is ANOTHER (important) thing. These are quite distinct and you CAN have one without the other, although it is much more common for infrastructure tagging to exist, but that way element is not included in a route relation rather than the converse. OpenCycleMap (OCM) does indeed display bicycle infrastructure tagging (e.g. "blue casing" on cycleway=lane), AND it displays bicycle routing in a way that has become familiar to many users (dark blue = route part of a local cycleway network, purple = regional, red = national), but OCM does not, for example display international cycleway network routes. So, also "thank you" for mentioning that cyclosm (.org) is an "emerging" alternative (as it is current in a version beginning with 0 zero) which renders BOTH infrastructure tagging AND route tagging in a way that happens to be richer than OCM. Sometimes, OCM is exactly what you want, sometimes not. Sometimes, cyclosm can "better display" what you are looking for. But the important thing is: tag infrastructure where it exists, tag routes where they exist. Then, you can choose the renderer that appeals to your end-use as you best see fit. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Help with bikeways on roads please
Thanks all! I've added shared lanes to Nelson St, so I'll update the Note & pass on your other comments to the OP. Thanks Graeme On Tue, 15 Mar 2022 at 12:27, Tom Brennan wrote: > The problem is that the street in question may not be part of a formal > route. > > Sydney has a lot of streets with cycle infrastructure, that aren't part > of a cycling route. > > I prefer CyclOSM for that reason. CyclOSM does a better job of showing > bicycle infrastructure, as well as cycling routes. Maybe direct the OP > to CyclOSM instead of OpenCycleMap! > > cheers > Tom > > Canyoning? try http://ozultimate.com/canyoning > Bushwalking? try http://bushwalkingnsw.com > > On 15/03/2022 12:15 pm, Phil Wyatt wrote: > > Hi Graeme, > > > > > > > > It appears that there is no cycle route relation attached to the street > in question. > > > > > > > > https://www.opencyclemap.org/docs/ > > > > > > > > Maybe ask the person to add the required route (if known) > > > > > > > > Cheers - Phil > > > > > > > > From: Graeme Fitzpatrick > > Sent: Tuesday, 15 March 2022 11:52 AM > > To: OSM-Au > > Subject: [talk-au] Help with bikeways on roads please > > > > > > > > I don't often map bikeways so need some help please. > > > > > > > > Spotted two Notes saying that there are bikeways on these streets: > > > > https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/1772764 > > > > https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/1772749. > > > > > > > > I had a look at both of them & they appear to already have bike info on > them: > > > > https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/172324363#map=18/-33.88605/151.17192 > > > > https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/178411646#map=18/-33.87695/151.16670 > > > > I closed them as already mapped, but the OP has re-opened them with the > comment "Doesnt show on OpenCycleMap". > > > > > > > > Should the existing bike details be sufficient to tag them as bikeways, > or is there more needed? > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > > > > > > Graeme > > > > > > > > ___ > > Talk-au mailing list > > Talk-au@openstreetmap.org > > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au > > ___ > Talk-au mailing list > Talk-au@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au > ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] First Nations flags?
On Fri, 17 Dec 2021 at 08:19, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: > > As I said, I flicked an e-mail to the PM & C Department but so far, not > even an acknowledgement, let alone an answer :-( > After quite a delay, I finally received an answer! Basically confirms what we had already discussed: "the Australian Aboriginal Flag and Torres Strait Islander Flag were proclaimed flags of Australia under section 5 of the *Flags Act 1953 *on 14 July 1995. As such, they are considered as other official flags of Australia; the Australian National Flag still takes precedence in Australia over all other flags." So while they are official flags, no, they are NOT National Flags. Indigenous is a good term so I'll update the wiki accordingly. Thanks Graeme > ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Mapping shared driveways
Interesting discussion; it does seem like the consensus is landing on the side of service=pipestem. There are 668 instances of driveway=pipestem in Australia: https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1gU6, but there is 0 instances of service=pipestem: https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1gUd. However, it seems as though I have had a disproportionate influence (509 of driveway=pipestem were last edited by me https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1gUf) I don't have a strong preference either way, so I'm happy to move over to the service=pipestem structure (possibly through bulk edit?) Dian On 2022-03-16 08:53, Andrew Harvey wrote: In the global community it's still disputed, see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Tag:service%3Ddriveway#Pipestems and my proposal to have this as an editor preset https://github.com/openstreetmap/id-tagging-schema/pull/239 where the tagging question is still not resolved. I've actually come around to the idea that service=pipstem is better, rational being that service=driveway is very clearly defined on the wiki as a non-shared driveway leading to a single residence. I think it's best we leave that intact and have a sibling tag service=pipestem for shared driveways. Otherwise you'll need to redefine service=driveway to be any type of shared or non-shared driveway and add a new tag driveway=single to most existing highway=service. On Wed, 16 Mar 2022 at 08:10, Tom Brennan wrote: I think I started the last discussion on this, so I'll wade in! Driveways are a bit of a nightmare - there are lots that don't fit neatly into one bucket or another. We did agree that service=driveway, driveway=pipestem was better than service=pipestem. It's probably 6 of one, half a dozen of the other as to whether the ones below are all shared driveways. Some could equally be classified as private residential roads. But they could all do with a clean up, one way or the other! cheers Tom Canyoning? try http://ozultimate.com/canyoning Bushwalking? try http://bushwalkingnsw.com On 15/03/2022 9:22 pm, Dian Ågesson wrote: Hi Seb! The last time this came up on the mailing list (https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/2021-September/015014.html) most people seemed to approve of the following mapping: highway=service service=driveway driveway=pipestem Dian On 2022-03-15 20:16, Sebastian Azagra via Talk-au wrote: Hi all, Had a query regarding the mapping of driveways / shared driveways as there seems to be quite a number of different approaches in the data. Below are three examples of similar ways that have different tags used in each instance. Highway=service Service= driveway https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/818426144 Highway=Residential Service= driveway https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/184844142#map=18/-38.00126/145.27585 Highway=residential https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/429541974 Reading the OSM wiki, none of these ways are correctly mapped as they are all shared driveways that leads from a road. my understanding that they need to be tagged as follows: Highway=service Service= Pipestem Would be interested in knowing your thoughts. regards, Sebastian ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Mapping shared driveways
In the global community it's still disputed, see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Tag:service%3Ddriveway#Pipestems and my proposal to have this as an editor preset https://github.com/openstreetmap/id-tagging-schema/pull/239 where the tagging question is still not resolved. I've actually come around to the idea that service=pipstem is better, rational being that service=driveway is very clearly defined on the wiki as a non-shared driveway leading to a single residence. I think it's best we leave that intact and have a sibling tag service=pipestem for shared driveways. Otherwise you'll need to redefine service=driveway to be any type of shared or non-shared driveway and add a new tag driveway=single to most existing highway=service. On Wed, 16 Mar 2022 at 08:10, Tom Brennan wrote: > I think I started the last discussion on this, so I'll wade in! > Driveways are a bit of a nightmare - there are lots that don't fit > neatly into one bucket or another. > > We did agree that service=driveway, driveway=pipestem was better than > service=pipestem. > > It's probably 6 of one, half a dozen of the other as to whether the ones > below are all shared driveways. Some could equally be classified as > private residential roads. > > But they could all do with a clean up, one way or the other! > > cheers > Tom > > Canyoning? try http://ozultimate.com/canyoning > Bushwalking? try http://bushwalkingnsw.com > > On 15/03/2022 9:22 pm, Dian Ågesson wrote: > > > > > > Hi Seb! > > > > The last time this came up on the mailing list > > ( > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/2021-September/015014.html) > > > most people seemed to approve of the following mapping: > > > > highway=service > > > > service=driveway > > > > driveway=pipestem > > > > Dian > > > > On 2022-03-15 20:16, Sebastian Azagra via Talk-au wrote: > > > >> Hi all, > >> > >> Had a query regarding the mapping of driveways / shared driveways as > >> there seems to be quite a number of different approaches in the data. > >> Below are three examples of similar ways that have different tags used > >> in each instance. > >> > >> Highway=service > >> Service= driveway > >> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/818426144 > >> > >> Highway=Residential > >> Service= driveway > >> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/184844142#map=18/-38.00126/145.27585 > >> > >> Highway=residential > >> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/429541974 > >> > >> Reading the OSM wiki, none of these ways are correctly mapped as they > >> are all shared driveways that leads from a road. my understanding that > >> they need to be tagged as follows: > >> > >> Highway=service > >> Service= Pipestem > >> > >> Would be interested in knowing your thoughts. > >> > >> regards, > >> > >> Sebastian > >> ___ > >> Talk-au mailing list > >> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org > >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au > > > > ___ > > Talk-au mailing list > > Talk-au@openstreetmap.org > > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au > > ___ > Talk-au mailing list > Talk-au@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au > ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Mapping shared driveways
I think I started the last discussion on this, so I'll wade in! Driveways are a bit of a nightmare - there are lots that don't fit neatly into one bucket or another. We did agree that service=driveway, driveway=pipestem was better than service=pipestem. It's probably 6 of one, half a dozen of the other as to whether the ones below are all shared driveways. Some could equally be classified as private residential roads. But they could all do with a clean up, one way or the other! cheers Tom Canyoning? try http://ozultimate.com/canyoning Bushwalking? try http://bushwalkingnsw.com On 15/03/2022 9:22 pm, Dian Ågesson wrote: Hi Seb! The last time this came up on the mailing list (https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/2021-September/015014.html) most people seemed to approve of the following mapping: highway=service service=driveway driveway=pipestem Dian On 2022-03-15 20:16, Sebastian Azagra via Talk-au wrote: Hi all, Had a query regarding the mapping of driveways / shared driveways as there seems to be quite a number of different approaches in the data. Below are three examples of similar ways that have different tags used in each instance. Highway=service Service= driveway https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/818426144 Highway=Residential Service= driveway https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/184844142#map=18/-38.00126/145.27585 Highway=residential https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/429541974 Reading the OSM wiki, none of these ways are correctly mapped as they are all shared driveways that leads from a road. my understanding that they need to be tagged as follows: Highway=service Service= Pipestem Would be interested in knowing your thoughts. regards, Sebastian ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Mapping shared driveways
Hi Seb! The last time this came up on the mailing list (https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/2021-September/015014.html) most people seemed to approve of the following mapping: highway=service service=driveway driveway=pipestem Dian On 2022-03-15 20:16, Sebastian Azagra via Talk-au wrote: Hi all, Had a query regarding the mapping of driveways / shared driveways as there seems to be quite a number of different approaches in the data. Below are three examples of similar ways that have different tags used in each instance. Highway=service Service= driveway https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/818426144 Highway=Residential Service= driveway https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/184844142#map=18/-38.00126/145.27585 Highway=residential https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/429541974 Reading the OSM wiki, none of these ways are correctly mapped as they are all shared driveways that leads from a road. my understanding that they need to be tagged as follows: Highway=service Service= Pipestem Would be interested in knowing your thoughts. regards, Sebastian ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] Mapping shared driveways
Hi all, Had a query regarding the mapping of driveways / shared driveways as there seems to be quite a number of different approaches in the data. Below are three examples of similar ways that have different tags used in each instance. Highway=service Service= driveway https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/818426144 Highway=Residential Service= driveway https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/184844142#map=18/-38.00126/145.27585 Highway=residential https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/429541974 Reading the OSM wiki, none of these ways are correctly mapped as they are all shared driveways that leads from a road. my understanding that they need to be tagged as follows: Highway=service Service= Pipestem Would be interested in knowing your thoughts. regards, Sebastian___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
