Re: [Talk-us] named links

[Paul Johnson]

This summarizes the approach I take towards this in regards to named or
reffed links.

At least until we start consistently expecting tags on entities to apply to
those entities instead of a completely different entity.  Adding ref to
ways instead of the relation that describes the route is redundant at best
and making editing and rendering support worse.

On Tue, Jul 3, 2018, 12:34 Evin Fairchild  wrote:

> There are some cases where naming link roads makes sense. For example, I
> tag the roads coming out of roundabouts as link roads (especially if it's
> something like a residential road intersecting, a note important road like
> a secondary road, and I tag the slip roads for that leg of the roundabout
> as secondary_link), and it is pretty helpful for routing purposes to name
> the link roads in that case. Also helpful if the link roads represent a
> RIRO (right-in, right-out) intersection.
>
> -Evin (compdude)
>
> On Tue, Jul 3, 2018, 9:28 AM OSM Volunteer stevea <
> stevea...@softworkers.com> wrote:
>
>> While I don't have "a dog in this fight," I also read our wiki which says
>> "Link roads NORMALLY do not have names."  (Emphasis mine).  In the unusual
>> (abnormal?) cases where they do (and I trust Paul wouldn't have added them
>> unless they do), there is no contradiction with our wiki, rather an unusual
>> case which isn't "normal."  In my opinion, that's OK.
>>
>> We should follow what our wiki says, in this case it leave a bit of
>> "wiggle room" to name a link road.  Paul has named some link roads where it
>> appears they do have such names in the real world, and I see no
>> inconsistency.
>>
>> Sometimes a datum in OSM will LACK all the tags it should, because some
>> are not known.  That's not great, but it's OK:  mappers who come along
>> later can add these (and improve this and other features in our map), this
>> is called "growing our map."  Sometimes an ADDITIONAL datum exists in the
>> real world and is added to a feature even when this is unusual (though not
>> incorrect) as many other similar data do not have this additional datum.
>> That's OK; I see no inconsistency.
>>
>> Our wiki strives to hit the sweet spot of accommodating what is in the
>> real world and how we should tag such data in our map.  It is a guide, not
>> absolutely strict doctrine.  I say this because we have "plastic tagging"
>> that encourages us to tag accurately while allowing flexibility.
>> Especially in early versions, we may not always write our wiki as 100%
>> correct, and so wikis grow, change and evolve to accomplish this.  If the
>> wiki needs updating to note that unusually, but in certain parts of the
>> world, link roads sometimes get names, I encourage you to update it:  we'll
>> all benefit.
>>
>> Writing/contributing to wiki is easy, though it can be tricky:  you want
>> to channel consensus without being too strictly doctrinaire in a direction
>> which would hobble contributions or just plain encourage/teach others to
>> enter them wrongly.  It is meant to guide us, not preach to us as an
>> absolute.  Where it is wrong, or one or more believe it wrong or
>> out-of-date with real world data, please use the Discussion page built into
>> each wiki to discuss with others any potential changes to existing wiki.
>> The "right thing" (better written wiki) usually happens soon after such
>> discussion.
>>
>> SteveA
>> California
>> OSM Volunteer since 2009 and serious contributor to not only our map's
>> data, but our wiki, too
>> ___
>> 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
>
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] named links

[Evin Fairchild]

There are some cases where naming link roads makes sense. For example, I
tag the roads coming out of roundabouts as link roads (especially if it's
something like a residential road intersecting, a note important road like
a secondary road, and I tag the slip roads for that leg of the roundabout
as secondary_link), and it is pretty helpful for routing purposes to name
the link roads in that case. Also helpful if the link roads represent a
RIRO (right-in, right-out) intersection.

-Evin (compdude)

On Tue, Jul 3, 2018, 9:28 AM OSM Volunteer stevea 
wrote:

> While I don't have "a dog in this fight," I also read our wiki which says
> "Link roads NORMALLY do not have names."  (Emphasis mine).  In the unusual
> (abnormal?) cases where they do (and I trust Paul wouldn't have added them
> unless they do), there is no contradiction with our wiki, rather an unusual
> case which isn't "normal."  In my opinion, that's OK.
>
> We should follow what our wiki says, in this case it leave a bit of
> "wiggle room" to name a link road.  Paul has named some link roads where it
> appears they do have such names in the real world, and I see no
> inconsistency.
>
> Sometimes a datum in OSM will LACK all the tags it should, because some
> are not known.  That's not great, but it's OK:  mappers who come along
> later can add these (and improve this and other features in our map), this
> is called "growing our map."  Sometimes an ADDITIONAL datum exists in the
> real world and is added to a feature even when this is unusual (though not
> incorrect) as many other similar data do not have this additional datum.
> That's OK; I see no inconsistency.
>
> Our wiki strives to hit the sweet spot of accommodating what is in the
> real world and how we should tag such data in our map.  It is a guide, not
> absolutely strict doctrine.  I say this because we have "plastic tagging"
> that encourages us to tag accurately while allowing flexibility.
> Especially in early versions, we may not always write our wiki as 100%
> correct, and so wikis grow, change and evolve to accomplish this.  If the
> wiki needs updating to note that unusually, but in certain parts of the
> world, link roads sometimes get names, I encourage you to update it:  we'll
> all benefit.
>
> Writing/contributing to wiki is easy, though it can be tricky:  you want
> to channel consensus without being too strictly doctrinaire in a direction
> which would hobble contributions or just plain encourage/teach others to
> enter them wrongly.  It is meant to guide us, not preach to us as an
> absolute.  Where it is wrong, or one or more believe it wrong or
> out-of-date with real world data, please use the Discussion page built into
> each wiki to discuss with others any potential changes to existing wiki.
> The "right thing" (better written wiki) usually happens soon after such
> discussion.
>
> SteveA
> California
> OSM Volunteer since 2009 and serious contributor to not only our map's
> data, but our wiki, too
> ___
> 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] named links

[OSM Volunteer stevea]

While I don't have "a dog in this fight," I also read our wiki which says "Link 
roads NORMALLY do not have names."  (Emphasis mine).  In the unusual 
(abnormal?) cases where they do (and I trust Paul wouldn't have added them 
unless they do), there is no contradiction with our wiki, rather an unusual 
case which isn't "normal."  In my opinion, that's OK.

We should follow what our wiki says, in this case it leave a bit of "wiggle 
room" to name a link road.  Paul has named some link roads where it appears 
they do have such names in the real world, and I see no inconsistency.

Sometimes a datum in OSM will LACK all the tags it should, because some are not 
known.  That's not great, but it's OK:  mappers who come along later can add 
these (and improve this and other features in our map), this is called "growing 
our map."  Sometimes an ADDITIONAL datum exists in the real world and is added 
to a feature even when this is unusual (though not incorrect) as many other 
similar data do not have this additional datum.  That's OK; I see no 
inconsistency.

Our wiki strives to hit the sweet spot of accommodating what is in the real 
world and how we should tag such data in our map.  It is a guide, not 
absolutely strict doctrine.  I say this because we have "plastic tagging" that 
encourages us to tag accurately while allowing flexibility.  Especially in 
early versions, we may not always write our wiki as 100% correct, and so wikis 
grow, change and evolve to accomplish this.  If the wiki needs updating to note 
that unusually, but in certain parts of the world, link roads sometimes get 
names, I encourage you to update it:  we'll all benefit.

Writing/contributing to wiki is easy, though it can be tricky:  you want to 
channel consensus without being too strictly doctrinaire in a direction which 
would hobble contributions or just plain encourage/teach others to enter them 
wrongly.  It is meant to guide us, not preach to us as an absolute.  Where it 
is wrong, or one or more believe it wrong or out-of-date with real world data, 
please use the Discussion page built into each wiki to discuss with others any 
potential changes to existing wiki.  The "right thing" (better written wiki) 
usually happens soon after such discussion.

SteveA
California
OSM Volunteer since 2009 and serious contributor to not only our map's data, 
but our wiki, too
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

[Talk-us] named links

[Oana Corobeanu - (p)]

Hello all,
I want to open a discussion with you about how a *_link should look like. I've 
encountered in Oklahoma a lot of named links, and from what I know links should 
not have name (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Highway_link). I've 
discussed with Paul Johnson, 
the user that set those links as*_link and he encouraged that these cases are 
correct as they are, I do not want to overstep and make the changes altogether, 
so I've decided to come to you, as community, for another opinion.

  1.  Do you think that ramps should have name or are there any special cases 
where the OSM wiki rule is not applied? Here are some way IDs of the sort:
osm_id=521950172
osm_id=542201866
osm_id=530900252


  1.  Also, I have another question and here are some way IDs as examples:
osm_id=140637592
osm_id=14917755
osm_id=14928196
Do you think these should remain as they are ex. Highway=primary_link and 
name=Northwest 19th Street ?
Or
Change the functional into highway=residential and name=Northwest 19th Street ?

Have a nice day,
Thank you for your help
OanaC

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