Re: [Talk-GB] Milton Keynes Redways - How to Tag Consistently
On 22/03/19 02:35, Peter Neale via Talk-GB wrote: Thanks to all for the helpful responses. I have looked (again) at the OSM Tags for Routing at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_tags_for_routing/Access-Restrictions#United_Kingdom from which it is clear that foot=yes (for example) is implied by highway=cycleway. However, Andy's question (if I understand it correctly) set me wondering whether there is any need to / benefit from distinguishing between foot=yes and foot=designated, etc. MK council, in their public mapping, imply that Redways are NOT (generally / universally) PROW. However, they DO seem to be "designated" for foot and cycle (and wheelchairs etc.), so perhaps they should be tagged; bicycle=designated; foot=designated,etc.,which highway=cycleway does not imply. Also, at the end of my original post, I asked: "*Naming* I am not aware of any Redways that have unique names (someone will probably correct me on this), but I see several on OSM tagged with “name=Redway”. Whilst I can see the attraction of doing this, I suspect that would not be considered good practice. Should I delete that name, whenever I see it? " Nobody seems to have commented on that yet (perhaps it got lost somewhere). Any views? I have transferred several 'names' to the description tag. Might be acceptable here? Regards, Peter On Thursday, 21 March 2019, 13:54:20 GMT, Andy Townsend wrote: On 21/03/2019 13:35, Ed Loach wrote: > How tagging changes over time... > > RichardF wrote: >> highway=cycleway, segregated=no achieves all that in two tags >> rather than >> seven. :) > I remember > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Milton_Keynes_Mapping_Party_2009 > where it looks like we (or at least I) only used highway=cycleway, e.g. > https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/34669428/history > If they have some legal status beyond being "mere shared cycleways" would some sort of designation tag also make sense here? Currently that's used for legal designations such as public footpaths, public bridleways (and also I think core paths in Scotland). Best Regards, Andy ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Vector OSM
https://www.klokantech.com/products/ ? Mapbox tiles? On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 15:19 chilton steve via Talk-GB, < talk-gb@openstreetmap.org> wrote: > I saw there was a discussion about vector tiles from OSM (…. at the SOTM > 2018 BOF session with Richard Fairhurst?). > > I am giving a talk about OSM in June and wondered what the latest > situation is. > > So, is there any moves to free server space and do the work to generate > vector tiles directly. Likewise is any third-party delivering vector tiles > from OSM data that I may have missed? > > Cheers > > Steve > ___ > Talk-GB mailing list > Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb > ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Milton Keynes Redways - How to Tag Consistently
Thanks to all for the helpful responses. I have looked (again) at the OSM Tags for Routing at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_tags_for_routing/Access-Restrictions#United_Kingdomfrom which it is clear that foot=yes (for example) is implied by highway=cycleway. However, Andy's question (if I understand it correctly) set me wondering whether there is any need to / benefit from distinguishing between foot=yes and foot=designated, etc. MK council, in their public mapping, imply that Redways are NOT (generally / universally) PROW. However, they DO seem to be "designated" for foot and cycle (and wheelchairs etc.), so perhaps they should be tagged; bicycle=designated; foot=designated,etc.,which highway=cycleway does not imply. Also, at the end of my original post, I asked: "NamingI am not aware of any Redways that have unique names (someone will probably correct me on this), but I see several on OSM tagged with “name=Redway”. Whilst I can see the attraction of doing this, I suspect that would not be considered good practice. Should I delete that name, whenever I see it? " Nobody seems to have commented on that yet (perhaps it got lost somewhere). Any views? Regards, Peter On Thursday, 21 March 2019, 13:54:20 GMT, Andy Townsend wrote: On 21/03/2019 13:35, Ed Loach wrote: > How tagging changes over time... > > RichardF wrote: >> highway=cycleway, segregated=no achieves all that in two tags >> rather than >> seven. :) > I remember > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Milton_Keynes_Mapping_Party_2009 > where it looks like we (or at least I) only used highway=cycleway, e.g. > https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/34669428/history > If they have some legal status beyond being "mere shared cycleways" would some sort of designation tag also make sense here? Currently that's used for legal designations such as public footpaths, public bridleways (and also I think core paths in Scotland). Best Regards, Andy ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] Vector OSM
I saw there was a discussion about vector tiles from OSM (…. at the SOTM 2018 BOF session with Richard Fairhurst?). I am giving a talk about OSM in June and wondered what the latest situation is. So, is there any moves to free server space and do the work to generate vector tiles directly. Likewise is any third-party delivering vector tiles from OSM data that I may have missed? Cheers Steve ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Milton Keynes Redways - How to Tag Consistently
On 21/03/2019 13:35, Ed Loach wrote: How tagging changes over time... RichardF wrote: highway=cycleway, segregated=no achieves all that in two tags rather than seven. :) I remember https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Milton_Keynes_Mapping_Party_2009 where it looks like we (or at least I) only used highway=cycleway, e.g. https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/34669428/history If they have some legal status beyond being "mere shared cycleways" would some sort of designation tag also make sense here? Currently that's used for legal designations such as public footpaths, public bridleways (and also I think core paths in Scotland). Best Regards, Andy ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Milton Keynes Redways - How to Tag Consistently
How tagging changes over time... RichardF wrote: > highway=cycleway, segregated=no achieves all that in two tags > rather than > seven. :) I remember https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Milton_Keynes_Mapping_Party_2009 where it looks like we (or at least I) only used highway=cycleway, e.g. https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/34669428/history Ed ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Milton Keynes Redways - How to Tag Consistently
Peter Neale wrote: >So how should they be tagged for access? I believe it should be: > highway=path (but I see several tagged as highway=cycleway and both are > shown in the Wiki > at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway=cycleway) > foot=designated > motor vehicle=permit (to allow the emergency vehicles and maintenance > vehicles) > moped=no > bicycle=designated > horses=not specified > segregated=no highway=cycleway, segregated=no achieves all that in two tags rather than seven. :) It's also more meaningful for routers/renderers, which can default to assuming "this was built to cycleway standards" (i.e. paved) rather than "this is just a path of some sort" (i.e. who knows). Though by all means do add surface=paved (or =asphalt) for clarity. Richard -- Sent from: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Great-Britain-f5372682.html ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
