Re: [Talk-GB] UK-ST LEONARDS-ON SEA: CYCLE DATA COLLECTION & MANAGEMENT CONTRACT
> From: Peter Miller > Incidentally, I was speaking to a senior professional person from the > South West a few days ago who was aware that OSM had just mapped MK > and was wishing that something similar could happen where he was. I > suggested that all he had to do was ask, be nice and offer warm beer > and pizzas at the end of the day from council funds! Hmm... If it's anywhere near St. Austell I'd probably be willing to travel some distance for some well-kept Admiral's Ale and a decent lamb jalfrezi In fact I wouldn't be surprised if mapping progress exhibited something like the Ballmer Peak[1] The OSM mapping party: if you feed it, they will come... cheers jack 1: http://xkcd.com/323/ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] maxspeed field - what units should we use. etc
On 4 Jun 2009, at 17:11, WessexMario wrote: > Robert Naylor wrote: On Thu, 04 Jun 2009 11:13:28 +0100, David Earl wrote: > I also came across someone tagging maxpeed=NSL yesterday. If it > gives > someone happiness, fine, but I don't really think it should be > necessary > to tag the default situation, only when there is an exception to > the > general rule > >> This page seems to confirm this: >> http://www.abd.org.uk/know_your_speed_limits.htm >> >> > There is a major problem with using maxspeed=NSL. > Dual Carriageways. > How will the applications know that a way is part of a dual > carriageway > or is just one oneway way that happens to be near another oneway way? Here is a proposal for using relations to combine carriageways and also one for collecting together all the slip-roads into a single feature called 'junction':- "To avoid duplication, the name/ref of the street should continue to be placed on the Ways of the street or in the Relation for the collected ways of a street. This relationship is only intended as a hint to renderers that the adjacent ways are actually part of the same street/road so the name could be positioned between the carriageways rather than in both, or the road number rendered only once for adjacent pairs of ways and similar applications. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Proposed/Dual_carriageways And this one for interchanges "The main purpose of the Relation at present is to give renderers or route planners a name and or number for a junction. It also means that a staggered cross roads controlled by linked traffic signals can be grouped into the one junction while still maintaining the geometry of the streets correctly. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Proposed/Junctions Regards, Peter > > > > > ___ > Talk-GB mailing list > Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] maxspeed field - what units should we use. etc
Peter Miller writes: > I have been looking at the coverage of maxspeed limit data for > highways in the UK and we seem to have a right mix of styles. > > Here is the data for bug chunk of England while avoiding including > anything from France or Ireland (which would include km/hour figure). > We current have over 17,000 highway ways tagged with maxspeed and also > 300 ways tagged as 'maxspeed:mph'. You will notice that for 30 miles > per hour we have 30, 30mph, 30 mph, 48.2, 48.28, 48.280, 48.27808, > 48.28032 and 48.28. > > Any suggestion on what we should recommend for the UK? I guess the USA > should also be party to this discussion but they have far less > population of the maxspeed field (only 70 uses in the Bay area) so > possibly we should come to a view first. Our options seem to be:- > maxspeed=30mph (the user should strip a trailing mph to find the value) > maxspeed=30 (leaving it for the user to realise that it is in the UK > and therefore imperial) > maxspeed=30 mph (the user should strip the last word if it is mph > including the space) > maxspeed:mph=30 (Easy for the user) > maxspeed=48.28 (with a defined precision) For metric use no work by > the user, for imperial use a look-up table is required or a conversion > and rounding This question is already answered on the OSM wiki: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:maxspeed The answer is that maxspeed=30mph is the recommended answer if the native units are mph. -- Andrew. -- Andrew M. Bishop a...@gedanken.demon.co.uk http://www.gedanken.demon.co.uk/ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] maxspeed field - what units should we use. etc
> There is a major problem with using maxspeed=NSL. > Dual Carriageways. > How will the applications know that a way is part of a dual > carriageway > or is just one oneway way that happens to be near another > oneway way? http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Proposed/Dual_carriagew ays If it's used widely enough it will no longer be proposed... ;) Ed ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] maxspeed field - what units should we use. etc
Robert Naylor wrote: >>> On Thu, 04 Jun 2009 11:13:28 +0100, David Earl >>> wrote: >>> >>> I also came across someone tagging maxpeed=NSL yesterday. If it gives someone happiness, fine, but I don't really think it should be necessary to tag the default situation, only when there is an exception to the general rule > This page seems to confirm this: > http://www.abd.org.uk/know_your_speed_limits.htm > > There is a major problem with using maxspeed=NSL. Dual Carriageways. How will the applications know that a way is part of a dual carriageway or is just one oneway way that happens to be near another oneway way? ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] maxspeed field - what units should we use. etc
> Adding another log to the fire... > Is there a case for specifying knots in the same way as mph for > waterway > tags? Maplint validation already allows this (maxspeed=10knots for example, with or without a space) Ed ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] UK-ST LEONARDS-ON SEA: CYCLE DATA COLLECTION & MANAGEMENT CONTRACT
On 4 Jun 2009, at 15:01, Andy Allan wrote: > Out of interest, how much would one of these tenders go for i.e. how > much do people pay in the "real world" for this kind of thing? Are we > talking £500, £50,000, £250,000? > No idea, but the tender process must have significant costs associated with it measured in £x,000. Anyway, I feel that the 'real world' is shifting and possibly in the real world' in future the answer will be 'not very much just so as long as you work with people not against them'. Incidentally, I was speaking to a senior professional person from the South West a few days ago who was aware that OSM had just mapped MK and was wishing that something similar could happen where he was. I suggested that all he had to do was ask, be nice and offer warm beer and pizzas at the end of the day from council funds! Regards, Peter > Cheers, > Andy > > On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 2:15 PM, Peter Miller > wrote: >> >> The DfT have just published a contract out for the collection and >> management of cycle data for St Leonards on Sea >> >> "Lot 1. Cycle data collection. Undertaking cycle surveys to extend >> the >> Ordnance Survey Integrated Transport Network to include information >> about existing cycling infrastructure and where cycling is permitted >> and recommended. Cycle data will be provided in accordance to >> CycleNetXChange specification (http://www.cyclenetxchange.org.uk/). >> >> "Lot 2 - Cycle data management. Managing the central database >> including coordinating data collection, journey planner publishing, >> data maintenance and quality assurance activities and managing local >> authorities and data suppliers. These activities are supported >> through >> the online data management tools provided by Transport Direct. >> http://www.publictenders.net/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=84033 >> >> Should we give the place a review and ensure it is top notch for >> cycling before the contact is awarded. The roads for the place seems >> to be complete, however there is a distinct lack of footpaths and >> cyclepaths in the town which seems unlikely. There is also a lack of >> paths through parks and there are no cycle lanes/tracks on roads >> according to OpenCycleMap. It might also need work on turn >> restrictions. >> >> The users retselkim, timsc, fyremoon and the_winch seems to be >> reasonably active in the area. It is too far for me to go but might >> be >> a good venue for a mapping party this summer - south coast, sun, sea, >> ice cream etc ;) >> >> >> >> Regards, >> >> >> >> Peter >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ___ >> Talk-GB mailing list >> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org >> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb >> ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] UK-ST LEONARDS-ON SEA: CYCLE DATA COLLECTION & MANAGEMENT CONTRACT
It appears to be a suburb of Hastings - I couldn't find separate population data for it just now. Wikipedia thinks the full name is correct. David On 04/06/2009 14:56, Shaun McDonald wrote: > It took me a while to find, as I was searching for: > St Leonards-on-Sea > However (assuming I've found the right place) it appears to be in the > data under just: > St Leonards > http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/node/356906703 > > So, which is correct? > > Map location: > http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=50.86&lon=0.5493&zoom=14&layers=B000FTF > > Shaun > > On 4 Jun 2009, at 14:15, Peter Miller wrote: > >> >> The DfT have just published a contract out for the collection and >> management of cycle data for St Leonards on Sea >> >> "Lot 1. Cycle data collection. Undertaking cycle surveys to extend the >> Ordnance Survey Integrated Transport Network to include information >> about existing cycling infrastructure and where cycling is permitted >> and recommended. Cycle data will be provided in accordance to >> CycleNetXChange specification (http://www.cyclenetxchange.org.uk/). >> >> "Lot 2 - Cycle data management. Managing the central database >> including coordinating data collection, journey planner publishing, >> data maintenance and quality assurance activities and managing local >> authorities and data suppliers. These activities are supported through >> the online data management tools provided by Transport Direct. >> http://www.publictenders.net/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=84033 >> >> >> >> Should we give the place a review and ensure it is top notch for >> cycling before the contact is awarded. The roads for the place seems >> to be complete, however there is a distinct lack of footpaths and >> cyclepaths in the town which seems unlikely. There is also a lack of >> paths through parks and there are no cycle lanes/tracks on roads >> according to OpenCycleMap. It might also need work on turn restrictions. >> >> The users retselkim, timsc, fyremoon and the_winch seems to be >> reasonably active in the area. It is too far for me to go but might be >> a good venue for a mapping party this summer - south coast, sun, sea, >> ice cream etc ;) >> >> >> >> Regards, >> >> >> >> Peter >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ___ >> Talk-GB mailing list >> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org >> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb > > > > > ___ > Talk-GB mailing list > Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] UK-ST LEONARDS-ON SEA: CYCLE DATA COLLECTION & MANAGEMENT CONTRACT
Out of interest, how much would one of these tenders go for i.e. how much do people pay in the "real world" for this kind of thing? Are we talking £500, £50,000, £250,000? Cheers, Andy On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 2:15 PM, Peter Miller wrote: > > The DfT have just published a contract out for the collection and > management of cycle data for St Leonards on Sea > > "Lot 1. Cycle data collection. Undertaking cycle surveys to extend the > Ordnance Survey Integrated Transport Network to include information > about existing cycling infrastructure and where cycling is permitted > and recommended. Cycle data will be provided in accordance to > CycleNetXChange specification (http://www.cyclenetxchange.org.uk/). > > "Lot 2 - Cycle data management. Managing the central database > including coordinating data collection, journey planner publishing, > data maintenance and quality assurance activities and managing local > authorities and data suppliers. These activities are supported through > the online data management tools provided by Transport Direct. > http://www.publictenders.net/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=84033 > > Should we give the place a review and ensure it is top notch for > cycling before the contact is awarded. The roads for the place seems > to be complete, however there is a distinct lack of footpaths and > cyclepaths in the town which seems unlikely. There is also a lack of > paths through parks and there are no cycle lanes/tracks on roads > according to OpenCycleMap. It might also need work on turn restrictions. > > The users retselkim, timsc, fyremoon and the_winch seems to be > reasonably active in the area. It is too far for me to go but might be > a good venue for a mapping party this summer - south coast, sun, sea, > ice cream etc ;) > > > > Regards, > > > > Peter > > > > > > > > > ___ > Talk-GB mailing list > Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb > ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] UK-ST LEONARDS-ON SEA: CYCLE DATA COLLECTION & MANAGEMENT CONTRACT
It took me a while to find, as I was searching for: St Leonards-on-Sea However (assuming I've found the right place) it appears to be in the data under just: St Leonards http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/node/356906703 So, which is correct? Map location: http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=50.86&lon=0.5493&zoom=14&layers=B000FTF Shaun On 4 Jun 2009, at 14:15, Peter Miller wrote: The DfT have just published a contract out for the collection and management of cycle data for St Leonards on Sea "Lot 1. Cycle data collection. Undertaking cycle surveys to extend the Ordnance Survey Integrated Transport Network to include information about existing cycling infrastructure and where cycling is permitted and recommended. Cycle data will be provided in accordance to CycleNetXChange specification (http://www.cyclenetxchange.org.uk/). "Lot 2 - Cycle data management. Managing the central database including coordinating data collection, journey planner publishing, data maintenance and quality assurance activities and managing local authorities and data suppliers. These activities are supported through the online data management tools provided by Transport Direct. http://www.publictenders.net/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=84033 Should we give the place a review and ensure it is top notch for cycling before the contact is awarded. The roads for the place seems to be complete, however there is a distinct lack of footpaths and cyclepaths in the town which seems unlikely. There is also a lack of paths through parks and there are no cycle lanes/tracks on roads according to OpenCycleMap. It might also need work on turn restrictions. The users retselkim, timsc, fyremoon and the_winch seems to be reasonably active in the area. It is too far for me to go but might be a good venue for a mapping party this summer - south coast, sun, sea, ice cream etc ;) Regards, Peter ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] maxspeed field - what units should we use. etc
>if a bot can do it then there's no reason the data consumers can't do >it too without the bot. >If you don't have a good reason to change something just leave it be. Or alternatively, why not just run the bot on the copy of the data at the input to the renderer*, rather than on the database itself? The effect for the rendered map is the same. * By renderer, I mean any consumer of the data (such as a routing algorithm) rather than just something that produces a visual representation of the data. Donald ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] UK-ST LEONARDS-ON SEA: CYCLE DATA COLLECTION & MANAGEMENT CONTRACT
The DfT have just published a contract out for the collection and management of cycle data for St Leonards on Sea "Lot 1. Cycle data collection. Undertaking cycle surveys to extend the Ordnance Survey Integrated Transport Network to include information about existing cycling infrastructure and where cycling is permitted and recommended. Cycle data will be provided in accordance to CycleNetXChange specification (http://www.cyclenetxchange.org.uk/). "Lot 2 - Cycle data management. Managing the central database including coordinating data collection, journey planner publishing, data maintenance and quality assurance activities and managing local authorities and data suppliers. These activities are supported through the online data management tools provided by Transport Direct. http://www.publictenders.net/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=84033 Should we give the place a review and ensure it is top notch for cycling before the contact is awarded. The roads for the place seems to be complete, however there is a distinct lack of footpaths and cyclepaths in the town which seems unlikely. There is also a lack of paths through parks and there are no cycle lanes/tracks on roads according to OpenCycleMap. It might also need work on turn restrictions. The users retselkim, timsc, fyremoon and the_winch seems to be reasonably active in the area. It is too far for me to go but might be a good venue for a mapping party this summer - south coast, sun, sea, ice cream etc ;) Regards, Peter ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] maxspeed field - what units should we use. etc
2009/6/4 WessexMario : > >> Very helpful. And to be clear is says their should be a space between >> the number and the unit, ie '50 mph' not '50mph'. > > I wouldn't get too concerned about the space, computers can handle that well, > so > an optional whitespace should be allowable. > >> So. are we reaching a point where we should do some clean-up work on >> the current tagging? Would that be appropriate? >> >> Should we add a space where required and convert the various km >> interpretations to either fit the proper km conversion from the table, >> or convert to mph. > > Definitely do a tidy up. It would be so much easier for all UK speeds to be in > mph, both for data entry and validation. Let computers do the conversions to > metric if they need to. > >> Is this something that Potlatch can do reasonably efficiently? > > Apparently there's a bot doing something reasonably efficiently somewhere. > Is it helping or hindering? being a pita. if a bot can do it then there's no reason the data consumers can't do it too without the bot. If you don't have a good reason to change something just leave it be. Dave ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] maxspeed field - what units should we use. etc
> Very helpful. And to be clear is says their should be a space between > the number and the unit, ie '50 mph' not '50mph'. I wouldn't get too concerned about the space, computers can handle that well, so an optional whitespace should be allowable. > So. are we reaching a point where we should do some clean-up work on > the current tagging? Would that be appropriate? > > Should we add a space where required and convert the various km > interpretations to either fit the proper km conversion from the table, > or convert to mph. Definitely do a tidy up. It would be so much easier for all UK speeds to be in mph, both for data entry and validation. Let computers do the conversions to metric if they need to. > Is this something that Potlatch can do reasonably efficiently? Apparently there's a bot doing something reasonably efficiently somewhere. Is it helping or hindering? Mario ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] maxspeed field - what units should we use. etc
On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 11:13 AM, David Earl wrote: > you may well find > that someone else goes round systematically changing them to km/h and > puts in maxspeed:mph - that's what's happened to most of the ones I've > done. Call them out publicly. This kind of thing is a PITA, and we need to make sure it doesn't happen. And letting them know such behaviour isn't helpful is a good start. Cheers, Andy ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] maxspeed field - what units should we use. etc
On 4 Jun 2009, at 12:48, WessexMario wrote: > Isn't all this already specified? > > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:maxspeed > " If your country uses kilometers tag the value without unit! " > " If your country still uses miles tag the value and append "mph" OR > convert to the EXACT kilometers per hour value! " > which is specified below to 5dp. Very helpful. And to be clear is says their should be a space between the number and the unit, ie '50 mph' not '50mph'. > > > The UK uses miles. so the first option doesn't apply > In the UK, the correct value would be '30 mph" , NOT a value in kph. > > If applications don't cope with mph, then they need updating as > they're > not following the specification. > > Adding another log to the fire... > Is there a case for specifying knots in the same way as mph for > waterway > tags? > for speed limits in harbours, canals, rivers, ,,, Makes sense. Another log... What about trains? Network Rail use mph, so I would suggest we do the same. So. are we reaching a point where we should do some clean-up work on the current tagging? Would that be appropriate? Should we add a space where required and convert the various km interpretations to either fit the proper km conversion from the table, or convert to mph. Is this something that Potlatch can do reasonably efficiently? Regards, Peter > > > > > ___ > Talk-GB mailing list > Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] maxspeed field - what units should we use. etc
On 04/06/2009 12:48, WessexMario wrote: > Isn't all this already specified? The trouble is tag specifications count for very little in OSM, as people ignore them because they think they have a better way of doing it, or when they make a mistake, or just on a whim. They're conventions not specifications. It makes writing a data consumer a nightmare, especially one that isn't visual so the incentive for people to make it look right on a map isn't there. David ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] maxspeed field - what units should we use. etc
Isn't all this already specified? http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:maxspeed " If your country uses kilometers tag the value without unit! " " If your country still uses miles tag the value and append "mph" OR convert to the EXACT kilometers per hour value! " which is specified below to 5dp. The UK uses miles. so the first option doesn't apply In the UK, the correct value would be '30 mph" , NOT a value in kph. If applications don't cope with mph, then they need updating as they're not following the specification. Adding another log to the fire... Is there a case for specifying knots in the same way as mph for waterway tags? for speed limits in harbours, canals, rivers, ,,, ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] maxspeed field - what units should we use. etc
On Thu, 04 Jun 2009 11:55:06 +0100, Tom Hughes wrote: > Robert Naylor wrote: >> On Thu, 04 Jun 2009 11:13:28 +0100, David Earl >> wrote: >> >>> I also came across someone tagging maxpeed=NSL yesterday. If it gives >>> someone happiness, fine, but I don't really think it should be >>> necessary >>> to tag the default situation, only when there is an exception to the >>> general rule >> If the road has regular street lights then NSL isn't the default. >> I've mapped a number of raods round here with maxspeed=national, but >> only the ones with lit=yes. > > Yes it is, it's just that the NSL for such a road is 30mph. Assuming the > street lamps are close enough together that is. I may be wrong as I don't drive, but my understanding is that 30mph isn't a national speed limit. Its a default speed limit for a built up area, but not a national speed limit. This page seems to confirm this: http://www.abd.org.uk/know_your_speed_limits.htm -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] maxspeed field - what units should we use. etc
2009/6/4 WessexMario > I propose that we adopt a new key: maxspeed_mph > If we have maxspeed_mph, I would be far happier seeing. maxspeed:mph maxspeed:km/h I don't like the idea of maxspeed and maxspeed_mph, we'll almost certainly find things defaulting to maxspeed, when it should be maxspeed_mph. I think having those two options makes more sense than having maxspeed defaulting to km/h unless mph (or some thing similar) is entered. Then in things like Josm, it can have two options for entering the speed, or a radio button or or or. As soon as the tag is explicitly one thing or another, the user will no longer be inclined to convert from one thing or another. The only down side I see, is that all of the applications that currently work with maxspeed, would need to be updated. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] maxspeed field - what units should we use. etc
2009/6/4 WessexMario > > > you only need 5dp to get an exact mph->kph conversion anyway :-) > > I think that's the big issue. > > People won't be able to agree on whether we should enter 0, 2,3 or 5 > decimal > places, Personally I think it should be to 1 decimal place ;) ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] maxspeed field - what units should we use. etc
> you only need 5dp to get an exact mph->kph conversion anyway :-) I think that's the big issue. People won't be able to agree on whether we should enter 0, 2,3 or 5 decimal places, if anyone can remember or look them up correctly. And it's completely unintuitive thinking of speed limits with non factor 10 vaules with decimal places. The accuracy for practical non-scientific use of the value is almost irrelevant, Journey times will vary more because of road conditions, speed cameras are set to a few mph above the limits, the legal requirement is for car speed to be measured to 10% accuracy. The problem is someone is always going to enter the wrong values if it's done in kph, and we'll keep on having umpteen different values for what should be and exact figure, eg 30 mph. The answer must be to have a solution that prefers 30,40,50,60,70 values in mph rather than (rounded or 5dp accurate) kph numbers,. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] maxspeed field - what units should we use. etc
> FWIW highway code conversions are: > 20mph = 32 > 30mph = 48 > 40mph = 64 > 50mph = 80 > 60mph = 96 > 70mph = 112 Ah - which differs from what is posted on roads out of ports: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Image:MaxSpeedConversionHarwich.jpg (60mph = 95km/h, 70mph=110km/h, and it looks like I didn't get the previous sign which gives all the other common speed limits in steps of 15km/h starting I think with 30mph=45km/h) Ed ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] maxspeed field - what units should we use. etc
On 04/06/2009 11:55, Tom Hughes wrote: > Robert Naylor wrote: >> On Thu, 04 Jun 2009 11:13:28 +0100, David Earl >> wrote: >> >>> I also came across someone tagging maxpeed=NSL yesterday. If it gives >>> someone happiness, fine, but I don't really think it should be necessary >>> to tag the default situation, only when there is an exception to the >>> general rule >> >> If the road has regular street lights then NSL isn't the default. >> I've mapped a number of raods round here with maxspeed=national, but >> only the ones with lit=yes. > > Yes it is, it's just that the NSL for such a road is 30mph. Assuming the > street lamps are close enough together that is. Indeed, that's what I meant. I don't put a speed on each residential road, because it's known to be 30mph without me having to say so. For non residential in urban areas, I still tend to use abutters to say this road is urban, but that's largely in lieu of a good way to say "this is an urban area" at present - but that's a different discussion. Where there is an urban 40mph, that's where I mark speed explicitly, or a primary or trunk rural road which is 50 (like many of Derbyshire's, for example). David ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] maxspeed field - what units should we use. etc
Robert Naylor wrote: > On Thu, 04 Jun 2009 11:13:28 +0100, David Earl > wrote: > >> I also came across someone tagging maxpeed=NSL yesterday. If it gives >> someone happiness, fine, but I don't really think it should be necessary >> to tag the default situation, only when there is an exception to the >> general rule > > If the road has regular street lights then NSL isn't the default. I've > mapped a number of raods round here with maxspeed=national, but only the > ones with lit=yes. Yes it is, it's just that the NSL for such a road is 30mph. Assuming the street lamps are close enough together that is. Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://www.compton.nu/ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] maxspeed field - what units should we use. etc
2009/6/4 WessexMario : > I propose that we adopt a new key: maxspeed_mph It exists: maxspeed:mph Problems I'll do inline: > > It would be > > - simpler for UK, USA and other imperial countries to enter the speed. > > - less prone to error - users may not be used to kph speeds. > > - un-ambiguous. (what does '50' mean?) all can be fixed by supplying units "mph". > > - maxspeed keeps consistently metric units (kph) > > - exact - being in the local units, no rounding necessary (no decimal > places). you only need 5dp to get an exact mph->kph conversion anyway :-) > > - value will usually only be an integer in a multiple of 10 or 5. - easy > to validate. except in windsor great park where the speed limit is 38mph. People have a tendency to round anyway, so it probably doesn't tell you much. > > - both maxspeed and maxspeed_mph keys could be entered - no ambiguity again except if they happen to be different speeds maxspeed:mph=30 maxspeed=96... what do I do? > > - applications can easily convert between maxspeed and maxspeed_mph > where only one is entered as they can if there's a unit > > - in transition, having a separate key would make it simple for > validators (people and computers) or a batch process, to convert > existing maxspeed keys in the UK and USA from the various existing > maxspeed variations to the expected multiples of 10 in maxspeed_mph we've already got a fricking bot doing that and it's pissing people off. Dave ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] maxspeed field - what units should we use. etc
On Thu, 04 Jun 2009 11:13:28 +0100, David Earl wrote: > I also came across someone tagging maxpeed=NSL yesterday. If it gives > someone happiness, fine, but I don't really think it should be necessary > to tag the default situation, only when there is an exception to the > general rule If the road has regular street lights then NSL isn't the default. I've mapped a number of raods round here with maxspeed=national, but only the ones with lit=yes. -- Robert ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] maxspeed field - what units should we use. etc
I propose that we adopt a new key: maxspeed_mph It would be - simpler for UK, USA and other imperial countries to enter the speed. - less prone to error - users may not be used to kph speeds. - un-ambiguous. (what does '50' mean?) - maxspeed keeps consistently metric units (kph) - exact - being in the local units, no rounding necessary (no decimal places). - value will usually only be an integer in a multiple of 10 or 5. - easy to validate. - both maxspeed and maxspeed_mph keys could be entered - no ambiguity again - applications can easily convert between maxspeed and maxspeed_mph where only one is entered - in transition, having a separate key would make it simple for validators (people and computers) or a batch process, to convert existing maxspeed keys in the UK and USA from the various existing maxspeed variations to the expected multiples of 10 in maxspeed_mph Mario (WessexMario) ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] maxspeed field - what units should we use. etc
I think a rude email to the talk list describing the bot and asking for someone to fess up to it would be appropriate. If someone is correctly tagging as per the wiki, why does anyone think a bot is tolerable? This is exactly the sort of thing that puts people off participating in the project. Richard ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] maxspeed field - what units should we use. etc
There is no right answer. If you tag things 40mph (which is what I do, like most of the other people who've replied) then you may well find that someone else goes round systematically changing them to km/h and puts in maxspeed:mph - that's what's happened to most of the ones I've done. I think it's being done with an occasional bot enforcing one user's opinion over the original mapper's. Given there are, as usual, as many opinions as there are contributors, and the rule we have, unfortunately IMO, is that there are no rules, the only way this will be solved is for consumers to understand all the reasonable variations. I also came across someone tagging maxpeed=NSL yesterday. If it gives someone happiness, fine, but I don't really think it should be necessary to tag the default situation, only when there is an exception to the general rule. David On 04/06/2009 10:49, Dave Stubbs wrote: > 2009/6/4 Peter Miller : >> I have been looking at the coverage of maxspeed limit data for highways in >> the UK and we seem to have a right mix of styles. >> Here is the data for bug chunk of England while avoiding including anything >> from France or Ireland (which would include km/hour figure). We current >> have over 17,000 highway ways tagged with maxspeed and also 300 ways tagged >> as 'maxspeed:mph'. You will notice that for 30 miles per hour we have 30, > > > You're assuming that's not a 20mph limit expressed in rounded down kph. > > >> 30mph, 30 mph, 48.2, 48.28, 48.280, 48.27808, 48.28032 and 48.28. >> Any suggestion on what we should recommend for the UK? I guess the USA >> should also be party to this discussion but they have far less population of >> the maxspeed field (only 70 uses in the Bay area) so possibly we should come >> to a view first. Our options seem to be:- >> maxspeed=30mph (the user should strip a trailing mph to find the value) >> maxspeed=30 (leaving it for the user to realise that it is in the UK and >> therefore imperial) >> maxspeed=30 mph (the user should strip the last word if it is mph including >> the space) >> maxspeed:mph=30 (Easy for the user) >> maxspeed=48.28 (with a defined precision) For metric use no work by the >> user, for imperial use a look-up table is required or a conversion and >> rounding > > Meh. 30mph == 48.28032 ~ 48.28 ~ 48 (and is what the highway code says). > Any of those as tags will do for most purposes. The only one I'd > complain about is specifying a mph value without the unit because it's > impossible to determine what was intended. km/h is common enough to be > used as the default. > Whitespace is trivial to remove. > > FWIW highway code conversions are: > 20mph = 32 > 30mph = 48 > 40mph = 64 > 50mph = 80 > 60mph = 96 > 70mph = 112 > > Dave > > ___ > Talk-GB mailing list > Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] maxspeed field - what units should we use. etc
2009/6/4 Peter Miller : > > I have been looking at the coverage of maxspeed limit data for highways in > the UK and we seem to have a right mix of styles. > Here is the data for bug chunk of England while avoiding including anything > from France or Ireland (which would include km/hour figure). We current > have over 17,000 highway ways tagged with maxspeed and also 300 ways tagged > as 'maxspeed:mph'. You will notice that for 30 miles per hour we have 30, You're assuming that's not a 20mph limit expressed in rounded down kph. > 30mph, 30 mph, 48.2, 48.28, 48.280, 48.27808, 48.28032 and 48.28. > Any suggestion on what we should recommend for the UK? I guess the USA > should also be party to this discussion but they have far less population of > the maxspeed field (only 70 uses in the Bay area) so possibly we should come > to a view first. Our options seem to be:- > maxspeed=30mph (the user should strip a trailing mph to find the value) > maxspeed=30 (leaving it for the user to realise that it is in the UK and > therefore imperial) > maxspeed=30 mph (the user should strip the last word if it is mph including > the space) > maxspeed:mph=30 (Easy for the user) > maxspeed=48.28 (with a defined precision) For metric use no work by the > user, for imperial use a look-up table is required or a conversion and > rounding Meh. 30mph == 48.28032 ~ 48.28 ~ 48 (and is what the highway code says). Any of those as tags will do for most purposes. The only one I'd complain about is specifying a mph value without the unit because it's impossible to determine what was intended. km/h is common enough to be used as the default. Whitespace is trivial to remove. FWIW highway code conversions are: 20mph = 32 30mph = 48 40mph = 64 50mph = 80 60mph = 96 70mph = 112 Dave ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] maxspeed field - what units should we use. etc
I'd vote for 30mph (no space), and locally (Oxford) we'll hopefully have cause to be using maxspeed=20mph for quite a lot of residentials, quite soon... It should be the digits on the sign. There might be a case for a different tag (maxspeedmph=30, say), but maxspeed=30mph is just as good. Richard ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] maxspeed field - what units should we use. etc
I tag what I see. I see 30 which implies 30mph, so I tag 30mph. The units differentiate it from km/h. Another mapper in this area (East Yorkshire) has tagged some in km/h with 2dp. Ulf then went over all of these and stripped the decimals off. As I encounter them I change them to imperial units, not because I like imperial units - I'm strongly in favour of SI units - but because I tag what I see. Cheers, Chris Peter Miller wrote: I have been looking at the coverage of maxspeed limit data for highways in the UK and we seem to have a right mix of styles. Here is the data for bug chunk of England while avoiding including anything from France or Ireland (which would include km/hour figure). We current have over 17,000 highway ways tagged with maxspeed and also 300 ways tagged as 'maxspeed:mph'. You will notice that for 30 miles per hour we have 30, 30mph, 30 mph, 48.2, 48.28, 48.280, 48.27808, 48.28032 and 48.28. Any suggestion on what we should recommend for the UK? I guess the USA should also be party to this discussion but they have far less population of the maxspeed field (only 70 uses in the Bay area) so possibly we should come to a view first. Our options seem to be:- maxspeed=30mph (the user should strip a trailing mph to find the value) maxspeed=30 (leaving it for the user to realise that it is in the UK and therefore imperial) maxspeed=30 mph (the user should strip the last word if it is mph including the space) maxspeed:mph=30 (Easy for the user) maxspeed=48.28 (with a defined precision) For metric use no work by the user, for imperial use a look-up table is required or a conversion and rounding Here is what we have at the moment for 'Mid England' including London, Portsmouth, Bristol, B'ham up to Liverpool, Manchester and Leeds etc) starting with the most popular:- 30mph 5185 48.000 4155 20mph 1282 64.000 922 32.000 871 40mph 833 96.000 383 30.000 341 80.000 300 112.000 294 30 mph 263 60mph 245 50mph 244 50.000 164 20 mph 160 48.2803200 144 48.280 97 40 mph 95 48.2780800 75 24.000 69 64.370 67 16.000 67 60.000 60 113.000 58 40.000 54 100.000 43 8.000 41 50 mph 40 97.000 39 national 35 80.4672000 32 20.000 31 64.3737600 29 70mph 27 10 mph 23 5mph 20 10.000 20 10mph 18 70 mph 18 5 mph 15 15mph 14 110.000 11 80.500 11 32.180 10 nsl 9 36.000 9 60 mph 8 45.000 6 15.000 6 NSL 6 32.1868800 6 19.000 5 7.000 5 64.400 4 11.200 3 42.000 3 15 mph 3 5.000 3 48.280 3 12.800 2 70.000 2 96.5606400 2 160.000 2 30mph..change me! 1 80; 50mph; 80 1 32.187 1 Carr Lane 1 112.6540800 1 38.000 1 48;96 1 32.200 1 48;64;80 1 8.050 1 54.400 1 48.300 1 48.200 1 16.090 1 12.000 1 Regards, Peter ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] maxspeed field - what units should we use. etc
Hi I think the principle of keeping it easy for the mapper should apply. In the UK, speeds are signed in mph, and most mappers will think in mph, so let's record speeds in mph. Anything else leads to confusion, conversions, varying degrees of accuracy. But to my mind, the worst result is the inability to spot errors. For example, a stretch of ring road near me has various speed limits at various sections. I could tell you it's 50mph for the first bit, 30mph at the roundabout, then 70mph beyond. But when I looked at it recently, different bits were marked up with a whole jumble of numbers (including 112 on one side of the dual carriageway, 113 on the other). Yes, I can convert from km/h to mph and back again, but not in a quick glance. When I map in France, I tag in km/h (just using a bare number), but in the UK I absolutely want to tag in mph. >From a data consumer's point of view, it's not hard to take any fields with mph at the end and preprocessing or converting on the fly, as long as there's consistency in using an 'mph' suffix. Seeing as there are more bare numbers that are obviously km/h than mph, saying a bare number in the UK should be interpreted as mph is asking for trouble, I think. So, I think maxspeed=30mph or maxspeed=48 should both be acceptable and equivalent, but maxspeed=30mph preferred in the UK. maxspeed=30 should NOT be used. One word of caution when looking at the tag usage in the UK - I've had swathes of my maxspeed tagging changed from mph to km/h by users (or their bots) in Germany and elsewhere, so beware using the current usage list as a measure how UK mappers want to tag. Keep it simple for the mapper and tag what's on the signs, and use an mph suffix to avoid confusion. Paul (southglos) -Original Message- Date: Thu, 4 Jun 2009 08:45:20 +0100 From: Peter Miller Subject: [Talk-GB] maxspeed field - what units should we use. etc I have been looking at the coverage of maxspeed limit data for highways in the UK and we seem to have a right mix of styles. Here is the data for bug chunk of England while avoiding including anything from France or Ireland (which would include km/hour figure). We current have over 17,000 highway ways tagged with maxspeed and also 300 ways tagged as 'maxspeed:mph'. You will notice that for 30 miles per hour we have 30, 30mph, 30 mph, 48.2, 48.28, 48.280, 48.27808, 48.28032 and 48.28. Any suggestion on what we should recommend for the UK? I guess the USA should also be party to this discussion but they have far less population of the maxspeed field (only 70 uses in the Bay area) so possibly we should come to a view first. Our options seem to be:- maxspeed=30mph (the user should strip a trailing mph to find the value) maxspeed=30 (leaving it for the user to realise that it is in the UK and therefore imperial) maxspeed=30 mph (the user should strip the last word if it is mph including the space) maxspeed:mph=30 (Easy for the user) maxspeed=48.28 (with a defined precision) For metric use no work by the user, for imperial use a look-up table is required or a conversion and rounding ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] maxspeed field - what units should we use. etc
I think we should tag what's on the signs ie. mph, as a conversion to kmh is error prone even without the rounding issues. I've tagged my local roads as maxspeed=20mph|30mph|etc Any application parsing maxspeed values needs to validate the data anyway because like all our data the field could contain anything so checking for mph as a suffix is hardly a big deal. Kevin On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 8:45 AM, Peter Miller wrote: > > I have been looking at the coverage of maxspeed limit data for highways in > the UK and we seem to have a right mix of styles. > > Here is the data for bug chunk of England while avoiding including anything > from France or Ireland (which would include km/hour figure). We current > have over 17,000 highway ways tagged with maxspeed and also 300 ways tagged > as 'maxspeed:mph'. You will notice that for 30 miles per hour we have 30, > 30mph, 30 mph, 48.2, 48.28, 48.280, 48.27808, 48.28032 and 48.28. > > Any suggestion on what we should recommend for the UK? I guess the USA > should also be party to this discussion but they have far less population of > the maxspeed field (only 70 uses in the Bay area) so possibly we should come > to a view first. Our options seem to be:- > maxspeed=30mph (the user should strip a trailing mph to find the value) > maxspeed=30 (leaving it for the user to realise that it is in the UK and > therefore imperial) > maxspeed=30 mph (the user should strip the last word if it is mph including > the space) > maxspeed:mph=30 (Easy for the user) > maxspeed=48.28 (with a defined precision) For metric use no work by the > user, for imperial use a look-up table is required or a conversion and > rounding > > > Here is what we have at the moment for 'Mid England' including London, > Portsmouth, Bristol, B'ham up to Liverpool, Manchester and Leeds etc) > starting with the most popular:- > > 30mph 5185 > 48.000 4155 > 20mph 1282 > 64.000 922 > 32.000 871 > 40mph 833 > 96.000 383 > 30.000 341 > 80.000 300 > 112.000 294 > 30 mph 263 > 60mph 245 > 50mph 244 > 50.000 164 > 20 mph 160 > 48.2803200 144 > 48.280 97 > 40 mph 95 > 48.2780800 75 > 24.000 69 > 64.370 67 > 16.000 67 > 60.000 60 > 113.000 58 > 40.000 54 > 100.000 43 > 8.000 41 > 50 mph 40 > 97.000 39 > national 35 > 80.4672000 32 > 20.000 31 > 64.3737600 29 > 70mph 27 > 10 mph 23 > 5mph 20 > 10.000 20 > 10mph 18 > 70 mph 18 > 5 mph 15 > 15mph 14 > 110.000 11 > 80.500 11 > 32.180 10 > nsl 9 > 36.000 9 > 60 mph 8 > 45.000 6 > 15.000 6 > NSL 6 > 32.1868800 6 > 19.000 5 > 7.000 5 > 64.400 4 > 11.200 3 > 42.000 3 > 15 mph 3 > 5.000 3 > 48.280 3 > 12.800 2 > 70.000 2 > 96.5606400 2 > 160.000 2 > 30mph..change me! 1 > 80; 50mph; 80 1 > 32.187 1 > Carr Lane 1 > 112.6540800 1 > 38.000 1 > 48;96 1 > 32.200 1 > 48;64;80 1 > 8.050 1 > 54.400 1 > 48.300 1 > 48.200 1 > 16.090 1 > 12.000 1 > > Regards, > > > Peter > > > > ___ > Talk-GB mailing list > Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb > > ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] maxspeed field - what units should we use. etc
Peter wrote: > Any suggestion on what we should recommend for the UK? Either of: maxspeed=30mph (the user should strip a trailing mph to find the value) maxspeed=30 mph (the user should strip the last word if it is mph including the space) The maplint validation uses a regular expression which validates either as OK. But: maxspeed=48.28 (with a defined precision) For metric use no work by the user, for imperial use a look-up table is required or a conversion and rounding No. As you can see there are so many arbitrary conversions in the figures you quoted and the best to use would be those signposted for foreign drivers at ports (which round to 5km/h, downwards I think). I think those are also in the highway code somewhere. But if we did this you wouldn't know whether maxspeed=50 was for mph or km/h. The wiki page for the maxspeed tag says (or did the last time I looked) that the default units are km/h, but other units should be stated explicitly. It used to say it had to be a number in km/h which has led to the mess of tagging in the UK which was ignored by the majority anyway (perhaps they don't read the wiki?) and added mph anyway. I'll admit that I also sometimes use maxspeed=national as there was some talk of the government redefining these limits from their current 70/60/30 values to reduce road fatalities, and if that were to happen I'd hate to have to go around trying to find out which roads tagged as 60 needed changing to 50. I didn't realise others were using variations on NSL/nsl I'll confess now that I helped with the maplint validation changes to support the already widely used mph suffix. I think the imperial heights/widths/lengths of 12'0" format is still an ongoing task (since last October), as it doesn't fall into the "Number with optional Unit" standard test format of a number followed by one of a list of units. Map Features links the "NumWithUnit" types (currently lengths/widths/heights/speeds) to this page: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Map_Features/Units Ed ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] maxspeed field - what units should we use. etc
I have been looking at the coverage of maxspeed limit data for highways in the UK and we seem to have a right mix of styles. Here is the data for bug chunk of England while avoiding including anything from France or Ireland (which would include km/hour figure). We current have over 17,000 highway ways tagged with maxspeed and also 300 ways tagged as 'maxspeed:mph'. You will notice that for 30 miles per hour we have 30, 30mph, 30 mph, 48.2, 48.28, 48.280, 48.27808, 48.28032 and 48.28. Any suggestion on what we should recommend for the UK? I guess the USA should also be party to this discussion but they have far less population of the maxspeed field (only 70 uses in the Bay area) so possibly we should come to a view first. Our options seem to be:- maxspeed=30mph (the user should strip a trailing mph to find the value) maxspeed=30 (leaving it for the user to realise that it is in the UK and therefore imperial) maxspeed=30 mph (the user should strip the last word if it is mph including the space) maxspeed:mph=30 (Easy for the user) maxspeed=48.28 (with a defined precision) For metric use no work by the user, for imperial use a look-up table is required or a conversion and rounding Here is what we have at the moment for 'Mid England' including London, Portsmouth, Bristol, B'ham up to Liverpool, Manchester and Leeds etc) starting with the most popular:- 30mph 5185 48.000 4155 20mph 1282 64.000 922 32.000 871 40mph 833 96.000 383 30.000 341 80.000 300 112.000 294 30 mph 263 60mph 245 50mph 244 50.000 164 20 mph 160 48.2803200 144 48.280 97 40 mph 95 48.2780800 75 24.000 69 64.370 67 16.000 67 60.000 60 113.000 58 40.000 54 100.000 43 8.000 41 50 mph 40 97.000 39 national35 80.4672000 32 20.000 31 64.3737600 29 70mph 27 10 mph 23 5mph20 10.000 20 10mph 18 70 mph 18 5 mph 15 15mph 14 110.000 11 80.500 11 32.180 10 nsl 9 36.000 9 60 mph 8 45.000 6 15.000 6 NSL 6 32.1868800 6 19.000 5 7.000 5 64.400 4 11.200 3 42.000 3 15 mph 3 5.000 3 48.280 3 12.800 2 70.000 2 96.5606400 2 160.000 2 30mph..change me! 1 80; 50mph; 80 1 32.187 1 Carr Lane 1 112.6540800 1 38.000 1 48;96 1 32.200 1 48;64;801 8.050 1 54.400 1 48.300 1 48.200 1 16.090 1 12.000 1 Regards, Peter ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
