Re: [Talk-us] Cardinal directions on highways & foreign languages

[Minh Nguyen]

On 2018-02-27 19:22, Angela Morley wrote:
I've come across an issue with the current implementation of cardinal 
directions in roles of relations. In certain areas of the world, roles 
are being used to determine the cardinal direction of a way in 
accordance with the AASHTO requirements, however those locales change 
the official name of the cardinal direction to the name of the direction 
in their local languages on road signage. Examples include highways in 
Puerto Rico and Quebec.


Should the tags north, south, east, and west be assigned in these 
locations according to the official language used on the road signs for 
those locations (precedent exists like this with Key:name), or should 
they remain English worldwide, regardless of country?


Given that these values are lowercase, they're best thought of as 
machine-readable values rather than freeform, human-readable values. So 
they should remain in English, like any other formal tag value, 
regardless of the sign's language. Taginfo shows that this has been the 
case so far in OSM:


 (tags on 
unidirectional child route relations)
 (roles on 
bidirectional route relations)


This problem has come up in a bug report I was filing with OSRM where 
they are currently just spitting out values like $north directly into 
the end user instructions because they don't know what the best way to 
handle the problem is yet. I had asked for it to be rendered as North, 
however the question of internationalization came up, and was so valid 
and pressing I thought it prudent to start a conversation about the 
topic. ( If you're curious, the original bug report: 
https://github.com/Project-OSRM/osrm-backend/issues/4918 
)


The OSRM library currently leaves it up to client code to replace the 
token with something more presentable. For example, the Mapbox 
Directions API currently replaces these $north tokens with English 
cardinal directions. It's a known issue that the API doesn't use French 
and Spanish cardinal directions in Québec and Puerto Rico, respectively, 
even though the rest of the instructions can be localized.




(Incidentally, this stretch of roadway is a concurrency of US 29 North, 
US 460 East, and US 501 South.)


Note that the behavior described above applies only to cardinal 
directions inserted based on route relations. However, most of the time, 
when you encounter a numbered route in OSRM's guidance instructions, 
it's due to a human-readable cardinal direction in the destination:ref 
tag, which is customarily written in the local language. So in Québec, 
it's currently possible for OSRM-based navigation software to announce 
an on-ramp onto "A-5 Nord" and then announce a merge onto "A-5 North".


--
m...@nguyen.cincinnati.oh.us


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

[Talk-us] Cardinal directions on highways & foreign languages

[Angela Morley]

 I've come across an issue with the current implementation of cardinal
directions in roles of relations. In certain areas of the world, roles are
being used to determine the cardinal direction of a way in accordance with
the AASHTO requirements, however those locales change the official name of
the cardinal direction to the name of the direction in their local
languages on road signage. Examples include highways in Puerto Rico and
Quebec.

Should the tags north, south, east, and west be assigned in these locations
according to the official language used on the road signs for those
locations (precedent exists like this with Key:name), or should they remain
English worldwide, regardless of country?

This problem has come up in a bug report I was filing with OSRM where they
are currently just spitting out values like $north directly into the end
user instructions because they don't know what the best way to handle the
problem is yet. I had asked for it to be rendered as North, however the
question of internationalization came up, and was so valid and pressing I
thought it prudent to start a conversation about the topic. ( If you're
curious, the original bug report: https://github.com/
Project-OSRM/osrm-backend/issues/4918 )

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

Re: [Talk-us] cardinal directions

[Paul Johnson]

On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 1:07 PM, Martijn van Exel  wrote:

>
> Martijn van Exel
>
> On Jan 18, 2017, at 9:35 PM, Paul Johnson  wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 8:59 AM, Martijn van Exel  wrote:
>
>> I am trying to be consistent with the outcome of the discussion that we
>> had on talk-us a couple of years ago. Right now both are used
>> (north/south/east/west as relation member role as well as direction on the
>> relation tag) but the former is used way more often. That’s why I am
>> suggesting going with the practice that has surfaced as the most popular,
>> as well as the outcome of earlier discussion.
>>
>> Perhaps I am not understanding you correctly, but I am *not* suggesting
>> to use tags on ways to indicate cardinal direction, just assign roles to
>> relation members. Agreed that adding this type of info to ways makes it
>> impossible to validate / maintain.
>>
>
> Right, I think we're on the same page.  I'm also suggesting it's high time
> we revisited the issue as the tools to handle managing
> north/east/south/west roles (as opposed to forward/backward) just plain
> never materialized.  If it was going to happen, it would have already
> happened (it's been years!).
>
>
> What tools were you thinking about? I remember submitting a patch to JOSM
> a while ago which did not get accepted.. That’s all I did on the tools end
> of things. Agreed support could be better.
>

JOSM first and foremost since it's the only editor and validator that seems
to pay much attention to directionality. Other tools (trying to think of
the name of the tool right now and coming up blank that I'm thinking of
specifically) seem to validate cleanly if there's one continuous path end
to end, order and direction regardless (so a fairly broken relation would
still pass).
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] cardinal directions

[Martijn van Exel]

Martijn van Exel

> On Jan 18, 2017, at 9:35 PM, Paul Johnson  wrote:
> 
> On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 8:59 AM, Martijn van Exel  > wrote:
> I am trying to be consistent with the outcome of the discussion that we had 
> on talk-us a couple of years ago. Right now both are used 
> (north/south/east/west as relation member role as well as direction on the 
> relation tag) but the former is used way more often. That’s why I am 
> suggesting going with the practice that has surfaced as the most popular, as 
> well as the outcome of earlier discussion. 
> 
> Perhaps I am not understanding you correctly, but I am *not* suggesting to 
> use tags on ways to indicate cardinal direction, just assign roles to 
> relation members. Agreed that adding this type of info to ways makes it 
> impossible to validate / maintain.
> 
> Right, I think we're on the same page.  I'm also suggesting it's high time we 
> revisited the issue as the tools to handle managing north/east/south/west 
> roles (as opposed to forward/backward) just plain never materialized.  If it 
> was going to happen, it would have already happened (it's been years!).

What tools were you thinking about? I remember submitting a patch to JOSM a 
while ago which did not get accepted.. That’s all I did on the tools end of 
things. Agreed support could be better.

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

Re: [Talk-us] cardinal directions

[Paul Johnson]

On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 8:59 AM, Martijn van Exel  wrote:

> I am trying to be consistent with the outcome of the discussion that we
> had on talk-us a couple of years ago. Right now both are used
> (north/south/east/west as relation member role as well as direction on the
> relation tag) but the former is used way more often. That’s why I am
> suggesting going with the practice that has surfaced as the most popular,
> as well as the outcome of earlier discussion.
>
> Perhaps I am not understanding you correctly, but I am *not* suggesting to
> use tags on ways to indicate cardinal direction, just assign roles to
> relation members. Agreed that adding this type of info to ways makes it
> impossible to validate / maintain.
>

Right, I think we're on the same page.  I'm also suggesting it's high time
we revisited the issue as the tools to handle managing
north/east/south/west roles (as opposed to forward/backward) just plain
never materialized.  If it was going to happen, it would have already
happened (it's been years!).


> This also does not have to preclude having separate e/w or n/s relations +
> a super relation — I think that is actually good practice for big relations
> to keep them manageable.
>

 Pretty much have to for any relation that has a dual carriageway at one
end and is more than a few ways long.
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] cardinal directions

[Paul Johnson]

On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 3:42 PM, Martijn van Exel  wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Some of you may remember the discussion we had on tagging cardinal
> directions in the US, which led to the wiki page[1] describing the current
> practice.
> Basically the convention we arrived on is to tag relation members with
> role=north/east/south/west to indicate cardinal direction.
> This is backed up by usage in the US. About 75% of way members of
> Interstate road relations have directional role members[2].
>

Can we *not* do this?  Can this *not* be a thing?  Can we instead go route
master and only have child *relations* have cardinal roles, with child ways
being exclusively forward/backward?  Because cardinal directions on the
ways themselves is 1) ambiguous AF and 2) breaks validation on a level that
it can take hours to days for experienced editors to manually validate, and
can't be automated as a result.
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

[Talk-us] cardinal directions

[Martijn van Exel]

Hi all, 

Some of you may remember the discussion we had on tagging cardinal directions 
in the US, which led to the wiki page[1] describing the current practice.
Basically the convention we arrived on is to tag relation members with 
role=north/east/south/west to indicate cardinal direction.
This is backed up by usage in the US. About 75% of way members of Interstate 
road relations have directional role members[2].

The Canadian highway system seems to follow similar conventions, having 
cardinal directions signposted. (Just picking out one example, [3])

The Telenav mapping team wants to help map cardinal directions in Canada now, 
and I have a few questions:
1) Is this way of tagging cardinal directions acceptable to the Canadian 
community as well?
2) For which regions / highways / highway types is it common to refer to the 
cardinal direction as part of the name?
2) How to deal with (mostly) single carriageways?

Posting to talk-ca and talk-us cc tagging because I think all three groups may 
have valuable input.

[1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Highway_Directions_In_The_United_States 

[2] See some number crunching here: 
https://gist.github.com/72a02709cecebfb7fcd563e701f4f064 
[3] http://openstreetcam.org/details/8671/13 
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us