Re: [Talk-us] Adopt-a-highway representation in OSM

[Richard Welty]

this should also go to the tagging list.



On 1/12/13 9:08 AM, dies38...@mypacks.net wrote:

(this is a follow-up post to my original at 
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/2013-January/010086.html and 
the responses thereto)

Thanks for the input on this topic earlier this month.  I'm in agreement with 
those who feel that the information is too volatile and potentially out of date 
to apply to the roadway itself.  I think it would be best to just document the 
physical artifact which exists aside the road.  Thus, I'd suggest to myself and 
others the use of

...information=adopt-a-highway
...sign=yes
...organisation={name of organisation}
...source (on changeset or object)=survey <= really should be obligatory
...source:date (on changeset or object)={date of survey}

Along with this would be a wiki page which describes the adopt-a-highway 
information and implications of the positioning of the sign.  In most cases, 
the sign appears on the roadside of the carriageway to which is applies.  Now, 
the signs do typically appear in pairs, with the positioning of the pair 
indicating the length of roadway to which the adopt-a-highway applies.  
However, when driving, you typically only see one of the pair; regular driving 
along a route can lead to awareness of the second position.

I think that creating a sign object in this way allows physical verification of 
the information presented to motorists without complicating highway tagging or 
creating an implication which would turn out to be incorrect about the actual 
state of affairs.




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

[Talk-us] Adopt-a-highway representation in OSM

[dies38061]

(this is a follow-up post to my original at 
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/2013-January/010086.html and 
the responses thereto)

Thanks for the input on this topic earlier this month.  I'm in agreement with 
those who feel that the information is too volatile and potentially out of date 
to apply to the roadway itself.  I think it would be best to just document the 
physical artifact which exists aside the road.  Thus, I'd suggest to myself and 
others the use of 

...information=adopt-a-highway
...sign=yes
...organisation={name of organisation}
...source (on changeset or object)=survey <= really should be obligatory
...source:date (on changeset or object)={date of survey}

Along with this would be a wiki page which describes the adopt-a-highway 
information and implications of the positioning of the sign.  In most cases, 
the sign appears on the roadside of the carriageway to which is applies.  Now, 
the signs do typically appear in pairs, with the positioning of the pair 
indicating the length of roadway to which the adopt-a-highway applies.  
However, when driving, you typically only see one of the pair; regular driving 
along a route can lead to awareness of the second position.

I think that creating a sign object in this way allows physical verification of 
the information presented to motorists without complicating highway tagging or 
creating an implication which would turn out to be incorrect about the actual 
state of affairs.

--ceyockey

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

Re: [Talk-us] Adopt-a-highway representation in OSM

[Michael Patrick]

 > To play Psychostik's advocate, translating girl directions.  "OK, now
stay right while you're turning left, because you're going to hang a right
after seriously the biggest tree you've ever seen, go five lampposts down,
turn left on McCallaugh...or was it McDowell?  McSomething.   Then you'll
keep going and hang a right after the Adopt-a-Highway sign for Drew Curtis'
FARK
UFIA."

Because I am a Luddite with a $15 drug store burner phone with minimal text
capability, I frequently transmit the sort of Val-Gal girl directions
above. Also known as "Kolmogorov Directions" ( see
http://xkcd.com/1155/), with two other additional merged Kolmogorov
sets (reassurance markers
("If you see the Burger King you are still on track" and exclusionary
markers ( If you see Doofer's you have gone too far"). Formulation uses a
further variation of 'minimum turns' and slackening of the end point
criteria (to where you can actually park, rather than the building). :-)

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

Re: [Talk-us] Adopt-a-highway representation in OSM

[Paul Johnson]

To play Psychostik's advocate, translating girl directions.  "OK, now stay
right while you're turning left, because you're going to hang a right after
seriously the biggest tree you've ever seen, go five lampposts down, turn
left on McCallaugh...or was it McDowell?  McSomething.   Then you'll keep
going and hang a right after the Adopt-a-Highway sign for Drew Curtis' FARK
UFIA."


On Wed, Jan 2, 2013 at 7:49 PM, Richard Welty wrote:

> On 1/2/13 10:49 AM, Richard Welty wrote:
>
>> On 1/1/13 7:32 PM, dies38...@mypacks.net wrote:
>>
>>> I am interested in what tagging you would suggest to indicate that a
>>> stretch of road has been "adopted" as part of an Adopt-a-Highway program.
>>>
>>>  unrelated to the source & amenity tagging discussion...
>> i think that maybe adapt-a-highway is probably an example of something
>> best done as a mashup rather than something that ought to go in the OSM
>> database.
>> it seems to me to be a likely maintenance problem in the long run.
>>
> now that i've thought about it a bit more -- do you have a use case for
> the data
> once it's entered into OSM? that is, what data consumer do you imagine
> would use it,
> why and how?
>
>
> richard
>
>
> __**_
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.**org/listinfo/talk-us
>
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Adopt-a-highway representation in OSM

[Richard Welty]

On 1/2/13 10:49 AM, Richard Welty wrote:

On 1/1/13 7:32 PM, dies38...@mypacks.net wrote:
I am interested in what tagging you would suggest to indicate that a 
stretch of road has been "adopted" as part of an Adopt-a-Highway 
program.



unrelated to the source & amenity tagging discussion...
i think that maybe adapt-a-highway is probably an example of something 
best done as a mashup rather than something that ought to go in the 
OSM database.

it seems to me to be a likely maintenance problem in the long run.
now that i've thought about it a bit more -- do you have a use case for 
the data
once it's entered into OSM? that is, what data consumer do you imagine 
would use it,

why and how?

richard


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

Re: [Talk-us] Adopt-a-highway representation in OSM

[Serge Wroclawski]

On Wed, Jan 2, 2013 at 1:20 PM, Jeff Meyer  wrote:
> Is there a difference between "deprecated" and "now used less frequently"?

I've tried to use "generally deprecated" for "Not used much and should
not be used much". Where I've failed to do that, I apologize.

Remember that virtually nothing in OSM is official (with a few very
notable exceptions), none of which apply to tagging.

- Serge

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

Re: [Talk-us] Adopt-a-highway representation in OSM

[Toby Murray]

The only real tag that is well and truly "deprecated" is created_by.
Both JOSM and Potlatch automatically and silently delete this tag from
any object you modify if it is present. So it is actually impossible
to create a new object with a created_by tag on it in the two most
popular editors.

Toby


On Wed, Jan 2, 2013 at 1:57 PM, Richard Welty  wrote:
> On 1/2/13 2:45 PM, Jeff Meyer wrote:
>>
>> Exactly. Where are these official declarations posted inside OSM?
>>
>> For example, Serge indicated source=* has been deprecated. Where is this
>> (should this be) recorded?
>>
> normally you'd indicate deprecation on the page for the tag itself.
>
> i'm not sure we have an official channel for deprecating a tag or practice
> right now, but i should think it ought to be beaten to death on the tagging
> list,
> at least, as a first step.
>
>
> richard
>
>
> ___
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

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

Re: [Talk-us] Adopt-a-highway representation in OSM

[Richard Welty]

On 1/2/13 2:45 PM, Jeff Meyer wrote:

Exactly. Where are these official declarations posted inside OSM?

For example, Serge indicated source=* has been deprecated. Where is this
(should this be) recorded?


normally you'd indicate deprecation on the page for the tag itself.

i'm not sure we have an official channel for deprecating a tag or practice
right now, but i should think it ought to be beaten to death on the 
tagging list,

at least, as a first step.

richard


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

Re: [Talk-us] Adopt-a-highway representation in OSM

[Jeff Meyer]

Exactly. Where are these official declarations posted inside OSM?

For example, Serge indicated source=* has been deprecated. Where is this
(should this be) recorded?


On Wed, Jan 2, 2013 at 11:16 AM, Richard Welty wrote:

> deprecated is a pretty official declaration that something shouldn't
> be done/used anymore
>



-- 
Jeff Meyer
Global World History Atlas
www.gwhat.org
j...@gwhat.org
206-676-2347
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Adopt-a-highway representation in OSM

[Richard Welty]

On 1/2/13 2:23 PM, Mike N wrote:

On 1/2/2013 2:16 PM, Richard Welty wrote:

in my experience, deprecated is a pretty official declaration that
something shouldn't
be done/used anymore. java developers like me are quite accustomed to
seeing
APIs we use suddenly coming up "deprecated", leading us to scramble to
the docs
to see what we're supposed to switch to now.


   I agree - I've already converted some of my local tagging away from 
a 'deprecated' tag, only to find out that none of the data consumers 
recognize the new tag.


  A better description would be "cross reference one or more alternate 
tags" for data consumers to expect and handle.
the data consumer lag is one of the nagging issues in OSM. with any new 
tagging approach, there is always
the issue of when the data consumers will catch up, and there are a 
bunch of data consumers, way more than
just the default mapnik rendering on opestreetmap.org and Nominatim 
(important alternatives include

mkgmap, OsmAnd, and a few others.)

so i am always kind of straddling the fence on one of these. right now i 
have a JOSM preset for fire hydrants
that populates both amenity=fire_hydrant and emergency=fire_hydrant. i 
suppose it's time to drop amenity=,

i think the data consumers that care have migrated.

richard


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

Re: [Talk-us] Adopt-a-highway representation in OSM

[Mike N]

On 1/2/2013 2:16 PM, Richard Welty wrote:

in my experience, deprecated is a pretty official declaration that
something shouldn't
be done/used anymore. java developers like me are quite accustomed to
seeing
APIs we use suddenly coming up "deprecated", leading us to scramble to
the docs
to see what we're supposed to switch to now.


   I agree - I've already converted some of my local tagging away from 
a 'deprecated' tag, only to find out that none of the data consumers 
recognize the new tag.


  A better description would be "cross reference one or more alternate 
tags" for data consumers to expect and handle.



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

Re: [Talk-us] Adopt-a-highway representation in OSM

[Richard Welty]

On 1/2/13 1:20 PM, Jeff Meyer wrote:

Is there a difference between "deprecated" and "now used less frequently"?

"Deprecated" sounds pretty official, especially in our unofficious (word?)
OSM society.

in my experience, deprecated is a pretty official declaration that 
something shouldn't

be done/used anymore. java developers like me are quite accustomed to seeing
APIs we use suddenly coming up "deprecated", leading us to scramble to 
the docs

to see what we're supposed to switch to now.

richard


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

Re: [Talk-us] Adopt-a-highway representation in OSM

[Jeff Meyer]

Is there a difference between "deprecated" and "now used less frequently"?

"Deprecated" sounds pretty official, especially in our unofficious (word?)
OSM society.

On Wed, Jan 2, 2013 at 4:42 AM, Serge Wroclawski  wrote:

> On Wed, Jan 2, 2013 at 6:55 AM,   wrote:
> > Whoa!  Source is a deprecated tag, having been for years?!  Good grief -
> the wiki has no indication that this is the case;
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:source .  Could someone please
> confirm that source is a deprecated tag and that it should no longer be
> used? --ceyockey
>
> You're right; the documentation didn't reflect that.
>
> The source tag is one of those things which has changed. We used to
> stick a ton of information on the object, but as time has gone on,
> we've moved metadata to the changeset.
>
> Another example of this would be "created_by". Older objects in OSM
> have a created_by tag that indicates the editor used to create the
> object. Modern editors put that information on the changeset. The
> editor community has discussed making "source" a default tag in the
> editor when a secondary source is used, for example if you were to
> have a Bing imagery layer, "source=bing" would be automatically filled
> in.
>
> "source" has been generally deprecated by use. Editors no longer use
> them by default, and most mappers don't use them on objects.
>
> The fact the documentation didn't reflect that is frustrating and
> confusing, but not surprising. I've fixed the documentation and added
> a section about the old use.
>
> - Serge
> >
> >
> > -Original Message-
> >>From: Serge Wroclawski 
> >>Sent: Jan 1, 2013 9:31 PM
> >>To: dies38...@mypacks.net
> >>Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Adopt-a-highway representation in OSM
> >>
> >>Off list.
> >>
> >>I see you've put source and source:date tags on many objects.
> >>
> >>"source" on objects has been deprecated for years.
> >>
> >>I also see you've omitted those tags on your changesets (where they
> >>should be). Sadly changesets can't be edited once they've closed, but
> >>maybe you can use them in the future?
> >>
> >>- Serge
>
> ___
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>



-- 
Jeff Meyer
Global World History Atlas
www.gwhat.org
j...@gwhat.org
206-676-2347
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Adopt-a-highway representation in OSM

[nicholas ingalls]

> it seems to me to be a likely maintenance problem in the long run.

I know in Canada it certainly is! There are two adopt-a-highway signs where
I live and both of the clubs that supposedly 'maintain' that part of the
highway stopped participating in the program 7 years ago. The signs have
remained up ever since.

Cheers,
ingalls
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Adopt-a-highway representation in OSM

[Richard Welty]

On 1/1/13 7:32 PM, dies38...@mypacks.net wrote:

I am interested in what tagging you would suggest to indicate that a stretch of road has 
been "adopted" as part of an Adopt-a-Highway program.


unrelated to the source & amenity tagging discussion...
i think that maybe adapt-a-highway is probably an example of something 
best done as a mashup rather than something that ought to go in the OSM 
database.

it seems to me to be a likely maintenance problem in the long run.

richard


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

Re: [Talk-us] Adopt-a-highway representation in OSM

[Serge Wroclawski]

On Wed, Jan 2, 2013 at 6:55 AM,   wrote:
> Whoa!  Source is a deprecated tag, having been for years?!  Good grief - the 
> wiki has no indication that this is the case; 
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:source .  Could someone please confirm 
> that source is a deprecated tag and that it should no longer be used? 
> --ceyockey

You're right; the documentation didn't reflect that.

The source tag is one of those things which has changed. We used to
stick a ton of information on the object, but as time has gone on,
we've moved metadata to the changeset.

Another example of this would be "created_by". Older objects in OSM
have a created_by tag that indicates the editor used to create the
object. Modern editors put that information on the changeset. The
editor community has discussed making "source" a default tag in the
editor when a secondary source is used, for example if you were to
have a Bing imagery layer, "source=bing" would be automatically filled
in.

"source" has been generally deprecated by use. Editors no longer use
them by default, and most mappers don't use them on objects.

The fact the documentation didn't reflect that is frustrating and
confusing, but not surprising. I've fixed the documentation and added
a section about the old use.

- Serge
>
>
> -Original Message-
>>From: Serge Wroclawski 
>>Sent: Jan 1, 2013 9:31 PM
>>To: dies38...@mypacks.net
>>Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Adopt-a-highway representation in OSM
>>
>>Off list.
>>
>>I see you've put source and source:date tags on many objects.
>>
>>"source" on objects has been deprecated for years.
>>
>>I also see you've omitted those tags on your changesets (where they
>>should be). Sadly changesets can't be edited once they've closed, but
>>maybe you can use them in the future?
>>
>>- Serge

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

Re: [Talk-us] Adopt-a-highway representation in OSM

[dies38061]

Whoa!  Source is a deprecated tag, having been for years?!  Good grief - the 
wiki has no indication that this is the case; 
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:source .  Could someone please confirm 
that source is a deprecated tag and that it should no longer be used? --ceyockey


-Original Message-
>From: Serge Wroclawski 
>Sent: Jan 1, 2013 9:31 PM
>To: dies38...@mypacks.net
>Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Adopt-a-highway representation in OSM
>
>Off list.
>
>I see you've put source and source:date tags on many objects.
>
>"source" on objects has been deprecated for years.
>
>I also see you've omitted those tags on your changesets (where they
>should be). Sadly changesets can't be edited once they've closed, but
>maybe you can use them in the future?
>
>- Serge

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

Re: [Talk-us] Adopt-a-highway representation in OSM

[Toby Murray]

The amenity tag is way too overloaded to the point where it is pretty
useless. It might as well be "thing" instead of amenity. Do not use it
for new things. Why not just make a new tag like
"adopt_a_highway=" - it only requires one tag to
encode to encode the information and is much more obvious.

I would agree with Serge that things like the survey date should be
put on a changeset tag. I'm not quite as sold on the source=* tag on
objects being completely deprecated though. I still use them
occasionally although I do try to avoid them.

Toby


On Tue, Jan 1, 2013 at 7:33 PM,   wrote:
> Thanks for your comments, Serge.  I'm confused by your reference to changeset 
> metadata as that is not easily accessible to future editors of the same ways. 
>  It would put informative content remove from the editing process.
>
> I've made reply comments in-line below.
>
> --ceyockey
>
>
> -Original Message-
>>From: Serge Wroclawski 
>>Sent: Jan 1, 2013 7:54 PM
>>To: dies38...@mypacks.net
>>Cc: osm talk us 
>>Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Adopt-a-highway representation in OSM
>>
>>On Tue, Jan 1, 2013 at 7:32 PM,   wrote:
>>> I am interested in what tagging you would suggest to indicate that a 
>>> stretch of road has been "adopted" as part of an Adopt-a-Highway program.
>>
>>> My thinking right now would be to include at the way level these additional 
>>> tags:
>>>
>>> ...amenity  {Adopt-a-Highway}
>>> ...operator:amenity {Air Liquide}
>>> ...source:amenity   {survey}
>>> ...source:amenity:date  {2013-01-01}
>>> ...source_ref:amenity   {roadside_sign}
>>
>>The source:amenity tag should be a source tag on the changeset. The
>>changeset also records the time of changeset, so there's no need for
>>that source:amenity:date.
>
> source:amenity:date refers to the date on which the survey was done, which 
> just happens to coincide with the date of entering the data.  The survey 
> could just as easily have been done 6 months ago, in which case, the 
> source:amenity:date might be 2012-06-01, for example.
>
>>I don't know what this source_ref:amenity means, but from the context,
>>it seems part of your description of sourcing, which should be part of
>>the changeset, which is how we handle metadata.
>
> Without association of a description of the source with the tag, there is no 
> way for editors to know where the information came from.  They should not 
> have to dig into the changeset metadata to find out that the amenity 
> information came from a roadside sign.  For one of the ways, we're at Edit 
> #4.  Say we get to Edit #20 and someone wants to find out where the amenity 
> information came from; it would be a major sifting activity through 
> changesets to uncover that information.
>
>>As for "amenity", I don't think that fits. You may want to talk to the
>>tagging list about tagging systems for this.
>
> Amenity as in the adopt-a-highway outcome is a cleaner roadway.
>
>>- Serge

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

Re: [Talk-us] Adopt-a-highway representation in OSM

[Serge Wroclawski]

On Tue, Jan 1, 2013 at 8:33 PM,   wrote:
> Thanks for your comments, Serge.  I'm confused by your reference to changeset 
> metadata as that is not easily accessible to future editors of the same ways.

Changeset tags are accessible to editors just as easily accessible as
regular tags are. They're stored alongside the object, and provide
more information about the changes. This issue of changeset metadata
has been discussed many times, and source tags on objects (and
especially metadata about source tags) are generally not used and are
deprecated.

Source tags on changesets make a lot of sense, on the other hand.

If you want to think about it in another way, all object tags are
about the object. The information about how the information about the
object got into OSM is contained in the changeset, and thus the
changeset tags.

> source:amenity:date refers to the date on which the survey was done, which 
> just happens to coincide with the date of entering the data.  The survey 
> could just as easily have been done 6 months ago, in which case, the 
> source:amenity:date might be 2012-06-01, for example.

You can add that to the changeset tags, if you want. It's really not
related to the object, but the edit (see above).

>>I don't know what this source_ref:amenity means, but from the context,
>>it seems part of your description of sourcing, which should be part of
>>the changeset, which is how we handle metadata.
>
> Without association of a description of the source with the tag, there is no 
> way for editors to know where the information came from.

Hopefully your question about this has been answered now.

> They should not have to dig into the changeset metadata to find out that the 
> amenity information came from a roadside sign.

Knowing how data was sourced is only important for historical reasons.
Users and editors don't care about source at this level, and we've
depreciated source tags on objects for a reason.

> For one of the ways, we're at Edit #4.  Say we get to Edit #20 and someone 
> wants to find out where the amenity information came from; it would be a 
> major sifting activity through changesets to uncover that information.

It's a single call to the API, or if you're in Josm, Ctrl-H, or if
you're on the web, click the history page for the object, etc.
Checking editing history is something OSM editors are used to doing.

But if you still have questions, please join the tagging list, since
this is a tagging discussion.

> Amenity as in the adopt-a-highway outcome is a cleaner roadway.

Please join the tagging list and discuss.

- Serge

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

[Talk-us] Adopt-a-highway representation in OSM

[dies38061]

Thanks for your comments, Serge.  I'm confused by your reference to changeset 
metadata as that is not easily accessible to future editors of the same ways.  
It would put informative content remove from the editing process.

I've made reply comments in-line below.

--ceyockey


-Original Message-
>From: Serge Wroclawski 
>Sent: Jan 1, 2013 7:54 PM
>To: dies38...@mypacks.net
>Cc: osm talk us 
>Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Adopt-a-highway representation in OSM
>
>On Tue, Jan 1, 2013 at 7:32 PM,   wrote:
>> I am interested in what tagging you would suggest to indicate that a stretch 
>> of road has been "adopted" as part of an Adopt-a-Highway program.
>
>> My thinking right now would be to include at the way level these additional 
>> tags:
>>
>> ...amenity  {Adopt-a-Highway}
>> ...operator:amenity {Air Liquide}
>> ...source:amenity   {survey}
>> ...source:amenity:date  {2013-01-01}
>> ...source_ref:amenity   {roadside_sign}
>
>The source:amenity tag should be a source tag on the changeset. The
>changeset also records the time of changeset, so there's no need for
>that source:amenity:date.

source:amenity:date refers to the date on which the survey was done, which just 
happens to coincide with the date of entering the data.  The survey could just 
as easily have been done 6 months ago, in which case, the source:amenity:date 
might be 2012-06-01, for example.

>I don't know what this source_ref:amenity means, but from the context,
>it seems part of your description of sourcing, which should be part of
>the changeset, which is how we handle metadata.

Without association of a description of the source with the tag, there is no 
way for editors to know where the information came from.  They should not have 
to dig into the changeset metadata to find out that the amenity information 
came from a roadside sign.  For one of the ways, we're at Edit #4.  Say we get 
to Edit #20 and someone wants to find out where the amenity information came 
from; it would be a major sifting activity through changesets to uncover that 
information.

>As for "amenity", I don't think that fits. You may want to talk to the
>tagging list about tagging systems for this.

Amenity as in the adopt-a-highway outcome is a cleaner roadway.

>- Serge


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

Re: [Talk-us] Adopt-a-highway representation in OSM

[Serge Wroclawski]

On Tue, Jan 1, 2013 at 7:32 PM,   wrote:
> I am interested in what tagging you would suggest to indicate that a stretch 
> of road has been "adopted" as part of an Adopt-a-Highway program.

> My thinking right now would be to include at the way level these additional 
> tags:
>
> ...amenity  {Adopt-a-Highway}
> ...operator:amenity {Air Liquide}
> ...source:amenity   {survey}
> ...source:amenity:date  {2013-01-01}
> ...source_ref:amenity   {roadside_sign}

The source:amenity tag should be a source tag on the changeset. The
changeset also records the time of changeset, so there's no need for
that source:amenity:date.

I don't know what this source_ref:amenity means, but from the context,
it seems part of your description of sourcing, which should be part of
the changeset, which is how we handle metadata.

As for "amenity", I don't think that fits. You may want to talk to the
tagging list about tagging systems for this.

- Serge

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

[Talk-us] Adopt-a-highway representation in OSM

[dies38061]

I am interested in what tagging you would suggest to indicate that a stretch of 
road has been "adopted" as part of an Adopt-a-Highway program.

Quoting from the Wikipedia article: "The Adopt-a-Highway program, also known as 
Sponsor-a-Highway (but see distinction below), is a promotional campaign 
undertaken by U.S. states, Provinces and Territories of Canada, and national 
governments outside North America to encourage volunteers to keep a section of 
a highway free from litter. In exchange for regular litter removal, an 
organization (such as Cub Scouts or Knights of Columbus) is allowed to have its 
name posted on a sign in the section of the highways they maintain."

My thinking right now would be to include at the way level these additional 
tags:

...amenity  {Adopt-a-Highway}
...operator:amenity {Air Liquide}
...source:amenity   {survey}
...source:amenity:date  {2013-01-01}
...source_ref:amenity   {roadside_sign}

An example changeset containing two contiguous road segments is at 
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/14493979 .

Thanks for your input.

--ceyockey

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