Re: [Talk-ca] Ref tags in Ontario -- also Manitoba and Quebec
It's worth mentioning that prefixes have been added in other provinces as well: - R (for Route) and A (for Autoroute) in Quebec (e.g. A 40, R 148) - PTH (Provincial Trunk Highway), PR (Provincial Route, i.e. secondary road) and Route in Manitoba (e.g. PTH 15, PR 241, Route 90) Other than Route for metro routes in Winnipeg, the highway shields can be determined algorithmically (in Manitoba, anything above 199 is a Provincial Route; in Quebec, everything below 100 and above 399 is an Autoroute); outside of Winnipeg, there is no chance of confusion as to which route marker to use, as there might be in Ontario. -- Jonathan Crowe http://www.jonathancrowe.net ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
Re: [Talk-ca] Ref tags in Ontario -- also Manitoba and Quebec
J'ai commenté il y a 4 mois le changeset suivant http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/29085742 invitant le contributeur OntarioEditor a venir discuter. Pour les routes du Québec, ces préfixes sont effectivement inutiles avec la classification existante des routes. Ces préfixes n'existent pas sur les panneaux routiers. Je vais donc utiliser Overpass pour repérer toutes les routes du Québec avec ces préfixe et enlever les préfixes. Pierre De : Jonathan Crowe jonathan.cr...@gmail.com À : talk-ca@openstreetmap.org talk-ca@openstreetmap.org Envoyé le : Lundi 29 juin 2015 11h42 Objet : Re: [Talk-ca] Ref tags in Ontario -- also Manitoba and Quebec It's worth mentioning that prefixes have been added in other provinces as well: - R (for Route) and A (for Autoroute) in Quebec (e.g. A 40, R 148)- PTH (Provincial Trunk Highway), PR (Provincial Route, i.e. secondary road) and Route in Manitoba (e.g. PTH 15, PR 241, Route 90) Other than Route for metro routes in Winnipeg, the highway shields can be determined algorithmically (in Manitoba, anything above 199 is a Provincial Route; in Quebec, everything below 100 and above 399 is an Autoroute); outside of Winnipeg, there is no chance of confusion as to which route marker to use, as there might be in Ontario. -- Jonathan Crowe ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
Re: [Talk-ca] Ref tags in Ontario
On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 7:51 PM, James Mast rickmastfa...@hotmail.com wrote: Well Kevin, Well, it seems that the edits from 'OntarioEditor' along the entire 405 were missed and still have the 'ON' in the ref tag on the ways. As for the new user doing it, it's 'North American Highways'. I sent him both a PM and a comment on a changeset [1] directing him here to the mailing list. Hopefully he'll respond back to me or post here. For all I know, he could be the same user above with a new account as he added the 'ON' back to the ref tag on the 400 [2]. He's also had QEW edits reverted 'TWICE' where he added the 'ON' to the ref tag. [3] I am starting to work on removing ON prefixes from highways. I have done highways 2-28 so far. This is going to take quite a bit of time. ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
Re: [Talk-ca] Ref tags in Ontario
Hi Kevin Andrewpmk (almost entirely him) and I reversed all of the ON prefixes to the 400-Series highways Many thanks to you both for doing that. Personally I don't think there should be any prefix for rendering or navigation purposes, but I guess it depends on whether you think county or regional road prefixes should be there for navigation or rendering purposes. Prefixes are definitely 'tagging for the map', so shouldn't happen, IMBO. Ontario's got a fairly robust boundary, so the relations should sort out what road is in what province. cheers Stewart ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
Re: [Talk-ca] Ref tags in Ontario
Well Kevin, Well, it seems that the edits from 'OntarioEditor' along the entire 405 were missed and still have the 'ON' in the ref tag on the ways. As for the new user doing it, it's 'North American Highways'. I sent him both a PM and a comment on a changeset [1] directing him here to the mailing list. Hopefully he'll respond back to me or post here. For all I know, he could be the same user above with a new account as he added the 'ON' back to the ref tag on the 400 [2]. He's also had QEW edits reverted 'TWICE' where he added the 'ON' to the ref tag. [3] -James [1] - https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/31782232 [2] - https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/4083201/history [3] - https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/67924382/history From: kevinfarru...@gmail.com Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2015 08:24:25 -0400 Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] Ref tags in Ontario To: jfd...@hotmail.com CC: rickmastfa...@hotmail.com; talk-ca@openstreetmap.org (Sorry I have to re-email this Daniel - I thought I pressed reply all :P) It was discussed in February in this thread: https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ca/2015-February/006404.html Andrewpmk (almost entirely him) and I reversed all of the ON prefixes to the 400-Series highways, but provincial highways and regional/county roads still retain their prefixes. Personally I don't think there should be any prefix for rendering or navigation purposes, but I guess it depends on whether you think county or regional road prefixes should be there for navigation or rendering purposes. -Kevin (Kevo)-Kevin Farrugia kevinfarru...@gmail.com On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 7:36 AM, Daniel Begin jfd...@hotmail.com wrote: AFAIK, it has never been discussed at least on this forum. I consider it as an error or even vandalism since it does not conform to acceptable rules (1) A similar behavior has been seen a couple of months ago where user:OntarioEditor added a prefix to ref tag for most primary/secondary roads in Quebec. I contacted him but never had an answer. The question was asked on this list by another user about such behavior. Unfortunately, I did not see any specific answer and his/her edits are still all over the place. Someone has more information? Comments? Daniel(1) http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_Edits_code_of_conduct From: James Mast [mailto:rickmastfa...@hotmail.com] Sent: June-25-15 23:56 To: talk-ca@openstreetmap.org Subject: [Talk-ca] Ref tags in Ontario I've been noticing that a user has been adding the prefix of 'ON' to the ref tags on ways recently in Ontario. Are you starting to do that now, or is this user in error with the current tagging practices? -James ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
Re: [Talk-ca] Ref tags in Ontario
I personally don't consider adding prefixes as 'tagging for the map'. They are
VERY useful for routers as well. Plus, to be honest, there should be a way to
easily identify what type a route is, especially when it changes between
classifications, like {3} does several times. Especially if {3} changes at an
intersection to \3/ and you're coming into the intersection from the other
road. The router would then be able to announce the highway type for you so
you can even verify via the shield that you're making the correct turn.
Us mappers in the USA have embraced them. It allows people to notice with a
quick glance what route type it is without having to dig deep into the data and
find the relation. I mean, to be honest, how would you be able figure out what
type of route is which when you have the two different routes with the same
number on the same segment, if the ref was just ref=74;74 on the map? [1]
(Blame the USA Congress for that one for getting it written into law. I-74
there really should have been another number, like a southern I-79.) Even
countries in Europe are embracing the 'prefixes', where you see 'M' for
Motorway, 'E' for Euro-routes, etc, when needed in OSM.
Honestly, I think Ontario should come out of the 'dark ages' and use prefixes
as well, but I'm not going to go around spam adding the 'ON' to the ref tags
and get blocked, because of it being against the CA communities wishes (at this
time).
Also, if all (or at least most) of the Ontario editors would agree on adding
the 'ON' to the ref, maybe MapQuest in their 'Open' maps would start rendering
the BGS Ontario shield (would look better on the map because the number would
be bigger than if using the standard stand-alone shields) on the map for those
routes, just like they have done for all of the US state highways. [2] They
base the rendering of shields off of the 'ref' tag, not relations, mainly
because most states don't have all of their relations done yet either (all US
highways and Interstates in all states are already done).
-James
[1] - https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/48876018
[2] - https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=15/40.7927/-80.1367layers=Q
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2015 22:00:59 -0400
From: scr...@gmail.com
To: talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] Ref tags in Ontario
Hi Kevin
Andrewpmk (almost entirely him) and I reversed all of the ON prefixes
to the 400-Series highways
Many thanks to you both for doing that.
Personally I don't think there should be any prefix for rendering or
navigation purposes, but I guess it depends on whether you think
county or regional road prefixes should be there for navigation or
rendering purposes.
Prefixes are definitely 'tagging for the map', so shouldn't happen,
IMBO. Ontario's got a fairly robust boundary, so the relations should
sort out what road is in what province.
cheers
Stewart
___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
Re: [Talk-ca] Ref tags in Ontario
AFAIK, it has never been discussed at least on this forum. I consider it as an error or even vandalism since it does not conform to acceptable rules (1) A similar behavior has been seen a couple of months ago where user:OntarioEditor added a prefix to ref tag for most primary/secondary roads in Quebec. I contacted him but never had an answer. The question was asked on this list by another user about such behavior. Unfortunately, I did not see any specific answer and his/her edits are still all over the place. Someone has more information? Comments? Daniel (1) http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_Edits_code_of_conduct From: James Mast [mailto:rickmastfa...@hotmail.com] Sent: June-25-15 23:56 To: talk-ca@openstreetmap.org Subject: [Talk-ca] Ref tags in Ontario I've been noticing that a user has been adding the prefix of 'ON' to the ref tags on ways recently in Ontario. Are you starting to do that now, or is this user in error with the current tagging practices? -James ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
Re: [Talk-ca] Ref tags in Ontario
(Sorry I have to re-email this Daniel - I thought I pressed reply all :P) It was discussed in February in this thread: https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ca/2015-February/006404.html Andrewpmk (almost entirely him) and I reversed all of the ON prefixes to the 400-Series highways, but provincial highways and regional/county roads still retain their prefixes. Personally I don't think there should be any prefix for rendering or navigation purposes, but I guess it depends on whether you think county or regional road prefixes should be there for navigation or rendering purposes. -Kevin (Kevo) -Kevin Farrugia kevinfarru...@gmail.com On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 7:36 AM, Daniel Begin jfd...@hotmail.com wrote: AFAIK, it has never been discussed at least on this forum. I consider it as an error or even vandalism since it does not conform to acceptable rules (1) A similar behavior has been seen a couple of months ago where user:OntarioEditor added a prefix to ref tag for most primary/secondary roads in Quebec. I contacted him but never had an answer. The question was asked on this list by another user about such behavior. Unfortunately, I did not see any specific answer and his/her edits are still all over the place. Someone has more information? Comments? Daniel (1) http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_Edits_code_of_conduct *From:* James Mast [mailto:rickmastfa...@hotmail.com] *Sent:* June-25-15 23:56 *To:* talk-ca@openstreetmap.org *Subject:* [Talk-ca] Ref tags in Ontario I've been noticing that a user has been adding the prefix of 'ON' to the ref tags on ways recently in Ontario. Are you starting to do that now, or is this user in error with the current tagging practices? -James ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
[Talk-ca] Ref tags in Ontario
I've been noticing that a user has been adding the prefix of 'ON' to the ref tags on ways recently in Ontario. Are you starting to do that now, or is this user in error with the current tagging practices? -James ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
