Re: [Talk-us] User in Florida changing several motorways to trunk

[Levente Juhász]

FYI the user also joined the changeset discussion as of recently. Based on
the message and previous changeset comments (e.g. "trunk-primary fixes
(that i messed up)" in
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/79132672#map=12/28.4681/-81.4027)
it seems to be an honest mistake.

I can help out with fixes over the weekend. Let me know if you come up with
a plan to restore highway=motorway tags.

Levente

On Tue, Jan 7, 2020 at 8:39 PM James Mast  wrote:

> I was just alerted to this by a friend, and thought I'd post about it here
> as well, since I don't really have the time to work on doing all the
> reverting that unfortunately needs to be done here (there's a lot).
>
> But over the last 2 weeks, there's been a user changing several 100%
> motorways (& are toll highways to boot) that just happen to be state
> highways in Florida from motorway to trunk.  This is mostly as far as I can
> tell in the Orlando area, but might affect other areas in FL too.
>
> I did leave the user a message on Changeset 79155661 (
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/79155661 ).  Hoping he will see
> it, but with all the major highways that have been seriously demoted in
> priority that could seriously affect routing very badly, I honestly
> couldn't wait for a response before I posted a message to here as well.
>
> Anybody willing to help out here in restoring the motorway tags to the
> proper highways?
> ___
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] User in Florida changing several motorways to trunk

[James Mast]

Well, I have noticed he has downgrade a ton of roads that were 'trunk' for 6+ 
years, which leads me to be believe they were tagged correctly if no other 
local mapper touched them in that time period.  There were also a few ways in 
that changeset you mentioned that he changed to secondary that at a previous 
time was trunk (till he changed it to primary late last year). See: 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/216669397/

Honest mistakes on his end? Perhaps.  But I'm just seeing way too many 
downgrades to be conformable with his 'highway type' changes to be honest.  
There's probably quite a few roads that he retagged as primary that need to be 
re-upgraded to trunk and so on.  Routing algorithms have probably been 
seriously damaged by some of the changes unfortunately.

As for restoring the 'motorway' roads, I've honestly just been manually fixing 
them.  Sure, takes longer, but allows me to catch the 'Emergency U-Turn' 
crossovers that are improperly tagged as a '_link', and fix them at the same 
time.  I've cleared & restored the proper motorway/motorway_link tags on 
FL-414, FL-429, FL-451, & FL-453 manually so far.  Leaves FL-408, FL-417, 
FL-528, and a few non-state roads around Walt Disney World.  But those routes 
are some pretty long ones, and will take some time to fix since they have 
several exits along them.

From: Levente Juhász 
Sent: Wednesday, January 8, 2020 7:56 AM
To: talk-us 
Cc: James Mast 
Subject: Re: [Talk-us] User in Florida changing several motorways to trunk

FYI the user also joined the changeset discussion as of recently. Based on the 
message and previous changeset comments (e.g. "trunk-primary fixes (that i 
messed up)" in 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/79132672#map=12/28.4681/-81.4027) it 
seems to be an honest mistake.

I can help out with fixes over the weekend. Let me know if you come up with a 
plan to restore highway=motorway tags.

Levente

On Tue, Jan 7, 2020 at 8:39 PM James Mast 
mailto:rickmastfa...@hotmail.com>> wrote:
I was just alerted to this by a friend, and thought I'd post about it here as 
well, since I don't really have the time to work on doing all the reverting 
that unfortunately needs to be done here (there's a lot).

But over the last 2 weeks, there's been a user changing several 100% motorways 
(& are toll highways to boot) that just happen to be state highways in Florida 
from motorway to trunk.  This is mostly as far as I can tell in the Orlando 
area, but might affect other areas in FL too.

I did leave the user a message on Changeset 79155661 ( 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/79155661 ).  Hoping he will see it, but 
with all the major highways that have been seriously demoted in priority that 
could seriously affect routing very badly, I honestly couldn't wait for a 
response before I posted a message to here as well.

Anybody willing to help out here in restoring the motorway tags to the proper 
highways?
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] User in Florida changing several motorways to trunk

[Paul Johnson]

On Wed, Jan 8, 2020 at 8:22 AM James Mast  wrote:

> As for restoring the 'motorway' roads, I've honestly just been manually
> fixing them.  Sure, takes longer, but allows me to catch the 'Emergency
> U-Turn' crossovers that are improperly tagged as a '_link', and fix them at
> the same time.  I've cleared & restored the proper motorway/motorway_link
> tags on FL-414, FL-429, FL-451, & FL-453 manually so far.  Leaves FL-408,
> FL-417, FL-528, and a few non-state roads around Walt Disney World.  But
> those routes are some pretty long ones, and will take some time to fix
> since they have several exits along them.
>

Not a bad time to doublecheck lane tagging and capture that detail, too.
I'm working through that on I 405 in LA right now, which somehow still had
mostly barely-improved-since-TIGER data.
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] USFS trail/road/route numbers

[Paul Johnson]

On Tue, Jan 7, 2020 at 3:15 PM Tod Fitch  wrote:

> In my area there seems to be a mix of how the US Forest Service route
> numbers are tagged on roads and trails. The main variations seem to be:
>
> name=“Forest Route 9N24”
> name=“FR 9N24”
> alt_name=“Forest Route 9N24”
> alt_name=“FR 9N24”
> ref=“FR 9N24”
> ref=“9N24”
>

Well, name should only be the name.  So the first four are wrong, refs are
not names.


> Things I’ve seen in the wiki that might pertain cover “National Forest
> Trails” [1] which seems to want a tag of “route_no” or “trail_no”. That
> just seems wrong.
>
> And in the United States roads tagging [2] which seems to prefer tagging
> like:
>
> ref=“NFR 9N24”
>
> Which I don’t recall seeing in my area.
>
> What should the preferred tagging be? My inclination would be to migrate
> the tagging in my area toward that listed on the US road tagging page (e.g.
> ref=“NFR 9N24”) even though my preference (for printed map display
> purposes) would be to simply use ref=“9N24”.
>

I'd go with ref=NF 9N24 and strongly consider making a route relation for
it.  Ideally, this would all be moot and it'd just be a refless, nameless
way with the route being on the relation alone (same could be said of
roads) but for some reason people don't want to kill the dinosaur on that
still.
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Railway improvements; stations vs. halts

[Greg Troxel]

Clay Smalley  writes:

> Over the last few months, I've been doing some systematic improvements to
> the passenger railway network across North America. Much of this has been
> filling out public_transport=stop_area relations for every railway station,
> including stop positions and platforms, as well as verifying the geometry
> of the underlying railways and classifying them (usage=*, service=*). My
> goal here is to prepare the map such that route relations can be more
> meaningful and accurately describe which track each train uses.
>
> In the course of doing this, I got a tap on the shoulder [1] and found out
> I was using a definition of railway=halt that may not match up with what
> people were expecting. As far as I know now, railway=station was originally
> intended for stations where trains are always scheduled to stop, and
> railway=halt for flag stops (aka request stops). In the German OSM
> community, there was a decision made for railway=halt to be used on
> stations that are missing switches, which means trains cannot switch
> tracks, terminate or reverse direction there—a distinction more relevant to
> railway operations and scheduling. Naturally, there are quite a lot more of
> these than flag stops.
>
> I'm in a predicament here. So far, I've mapped all Amtrak stations and
> various commuter rail stations across the Northeast according to the
> no-switches definition of halt. I'm happy to revert these back to stations
> (wherever they aren't flag stops), though I'd like to hear others' thoughts
> before going through with that.

I find the notion that "no switches -> halt" notion bizarre and brand
new.  So I would very much be in favor of you going back to what I
consider a normal definition.   I'd say that's railyway=halt if there
are *no* scheduled stops.

Around me, the commuter rail has mostly what I'd calls stations:  fixed
infrastructure for trains and scheduled stops.   There are a few places
that are called "flag stops", but that really means:

  train stops if a passenger on the train asks, or if people are visible
  on the platform

but typically such places have some trains alwys stop and some treat
them as flag stops.  So I think they ar railway=station.



I would say if people want to tag absence of switches/etc. that should
be some train-nerd extra key.  This is not relevant to people or routers
using the data.

___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] User in Florida changing several motorways to trunk

[Mike N]

On 1/8/2020 9:20 AM, James Mast wrote:
Honest mistakes on his end? Perhaps.� But I'm just seeing way too many 
downgrades to be conformable with his 'highway type' changes to be 
honest.� There's probably quite a few roads that he retagged as primary 
that need to be re-upgraded to trunk and so on. Routing algorithms have 
probably been seriously damaged by some of the changes unfortunately.


This is the first case I remember where the trend was to downgrade 
everything in sight, and he hasn't given the usual alternative point of 
reference to clarify where he was coming from.


___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Railway improvements; stations vs. halts

[stevea]

Good question, Clay.  I agree with Joseph's recommendation to revert to 
railway=station.  Germany (likely the densest national rail network in the 
world, as well as home to OpenRailwayMap.org) has a rather exacting set of 
definitions for distinct specificity on its rail in OSM, to the point where its 
rail mapping in our project (slightly) diverges from how much the world maps 
rail in OSM.  For example, Germany uses route=tracks relations, we do not in 
the US, and there is no apparent "ill effect" to mapping (as in ORM) or routing 
(as far as I can tell) after many years of all states in the USA doing this.

We also have United_States/Railways and OpenRailwayMap/Tagging_in_North_America 
(under construction) which document these divergences (where known).  These 
wiki are exactly where such "we do things like this in the USA" (or North 
America) can be found.  Finally, there is a trend towards state-level 
/Railroads wikis.  While these state-level wiki don't (need to) mention 
railway=station as we discuss it, you might want to add some clarification to 
the national and continental-level wiki that in the USA we are doing a sort of 
conflation of halt and station as you describe it (and that this diverges from 
how the ORM wiki strictly defines halt).

SteveA
California
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Railway improvements; stations vs. halts

[stevea]

I forgot to mention that I have also directly edited the OpenRailwayMap/Tagging 
wiki itself by sprinkling several "In North America..." text blurbs.  These are 
nearly always left intact by other wiki reviewers (and that page is very well 
watched and heavily/strictly "policed" for accuracy).

Finally, you could also add a similar "In North America..." text blurb directly 
to 
https://wiki.osm.org/wiki/Tag:railway%3Dhalt#Distinction_Between_Halt_and_Station
 (there is already one bullet point that is specific to Germany).

SteveA
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Railway improvements; stations vs. halts

[Harald Kliems]

FWIW, the German wiki page for railway=halt has a section that acknowledges
that the German definition and international usage differ: "Outside the
German-speaking world, railway=halt is defined as an unimportation railway
station that only has the most basic equipment and isn't staffed (in
Germany this would correspond to railway station categories 6 to 7)."
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:railway%3Dhalt#Internationale_Definition

 Harald.

On Tue, Jan 7, 2020 at 10:23 PM Joseph Eisenberg 
wrote:

> According to the wiki page, railway=halt is mainly used for "A small
> station, may not have a platform, trains may only stop on request."
> The presence of points/switches is only significant in Germany.
>
> I would recommend reverting to railway=station for any which have
> platforms and are regularly scheduled places for the train to stop.
>
> -Joseph Eisenberg
>
> On 1/8/20, Clay Smalley  wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Over the last few months, I've been doing some systematic improvements to
> > the passenger railway network across North America. Much of this has been
> > filling out public_transport=stop_area relations for every railway
> station,
> > including stop positions and platforms, as well as verifying the geometry
> > of the underlying railways and classifying them (usage=*, service=*). My
> > goal here is to prepare the map such that route relations can be more
> > meaningful and accurately describe which track each train uses.
> >
> > In the course of doing this, I got a tap on the shoulder [1] and found
> out
> > I was using a definition of railway=halt that may not match up with what
> > people were expecting. As far as I know now, railway=station was
> originally
> > intended for stations where trains are always scheduled to stop, and
> > railway=halt for flag stops (aka request stops). In the German OSM
> > community, there was a decision made for railway=halt to be used on
> > stations that are missing switches, which means trains cannot switch
> > tracks, terminate or reverse direction there—a distinction more relevant
> to
> > railway operations and scheduling. Naturally, there are quite a lot more
> of
> > these than flag stops.
> >
> > I'm in a predicament here. So far, I've mapped all Amtrak stations and
> > various commuter rail stations across the Northeast according to the
> > no-switches definition of halt. I'm happy to revert these back to
> stations
> > (wherever they aren't flag stops), though I'd like to hear others'
> thoughts
> > before going through with that.
> >
> > -Clay
> >
> > [1] https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/77959450
> >
>
> ___
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>


-- 
Please use encrypted communication whenever possible!
Key-ID: 0x34cb93972f186565
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Railway improvements; stations vs. halts

[Clay Smalley]

Thanks, all. This pretty much confirms what I expected. I'll go ahead and
bring them back to railway=station.

-Clay


On Wed, Jan 8, 2020 at 9:34 AM Harald Kliems  wrote:

> FWIW, the German wiki page for railway=halt has a section that
> acknowledges that the German definition and international usage differ:
> "Outside the German-speaking world, railway=halt is defined as an
> unimportation railway station that only has the most basic equipment and
> isn't staffed (in Germany this would correspond to railway station
> categories 6 to 7)."
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:railway%3Dhalt#Internationale_Definition
>
>  Harald.
>
> On Tue, Jan 7, 2020 at 10:23 PM Joseph Eisenberg <
> joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> According to the wiki page, railway=halt is mainly used for "A small
>> station, may not have a platform, trains may only stop on request."
>> The presence of points/switches is only significant in Germany.
>>
>> I would recommend reverting to railway=station for any which have
>> platforms and are regularly scheduled places for the train to stop.
>>
>> -Joseph Eisenberg
>>
>> On 1/8/20, Clay Smalley  wrote:
>> > Hi all,
>> >
>> > Over the last few months, I've been doing some systematic improvements
>> to
>> > the passenger railway network across North America. Much of this has
>> been
>> > filling out public_transport=stop_area relations for every railway
>> station,
>> > including stop positions and platforms, as well as verifying the
>> geometry
>> > of the underlying railways and classifying them (usage=*, service=*). My
>> > goal here is to prepare the map such that route relations can be more
>> > meaningful and accurately describe which track each train uses.
>> >
>> > In the course of doing this, I got a tap on the shoulder [1] and found
>> out
>> > I was using a definition of railway=halt that may not match up with what
>> > people were expecting. As far as I know now, railway=station was
>> originally
>> > intended for stations where trains are always scheduled to stop, and
>> > railway=halt for flag stops (aka request stops). In the German OSM
>> > community, there was a decision made for railway=halt to be used on
>> > stations that are missing switches, which means trains cannot switch
>> > tracks, terminate or reverse direction there—a distinction more
>> relevant to
>> > railway operations and scheduling. Naturally, there are quite a lot
>> more of
>> > these than flag stops.
>> >
>> > I'm in a predicament here. So far, I've mapped all Amtrak stations and
>> > various commuter rail stations across the Northeast according to the
>> > no-switches definition of halt. I'm happy to revert these back to
>> stations
>> > (wherever they aren't flag stops), though I'd like to hear others'
>> thoughts
>> > before going through with that.
>> >
>> > -Clay
>> >
>> > [1] https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/77959450
>> >
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-us mailing list
>> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>>
>
>
> --
> Please use encrypted communication whenever possible!
> Key-ID: 0x34cb93972f186565
>
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Railway improvements; stations vs. halts

[stevea]

> Clay Smalley  wrote:
> Thanks, all. This pretty much confirms what I expected. I'll go ahead and 
> bring them back to railway=station.


Clay, I know it is an extra ask, I request that you document how you're doing 
this at (minimally):

https://wiki.osm.org/wiki/Tag:railway%3Dhalt#Distinction_Between_Halt_and_Station
and
https://wiki.osm.org/wiki/OpenRailwayMap/Tagging#Stations_.2F_Stops

with the usual "In North America..." distinction text that is similarly 
sprinkled around the latter.

I'd consider it optional (though courteous) to find a place to add this to:
https://wiki.osm.org/wiki/United_States/Railways
and
https://wiki.osm.org/wiki/OpenRailwayMap/Tagging_in_North_America

although I leave how and where exactly (or even whether you do so) up to you.

Thank you,
SteveA

___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

[Talk-us] OpenStreetMap US Newsletter Jan 2020

[Maggie Cawley]

Are you subscribed to the OpenStreetMap US Newsletter? Check out the latest
issue here https://mailchi.mp/osmnewsletter/the-openstreetmap-us-newsletter and
subscribe here
https://us3.campaign-archive.com/home/?u=162692bfdedb78ec46fd108a3&id=801ce00e6d
!

The Newsletter will continue to be released monthly, so please feel free to
share any community events or activities with me any time!

Happy Mapping!
Maggie

*Maggie Cawley*
Executive Director
OpenStreetMap US
www.openstreetmap.us
@MaggieMaps 
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us