Re: [Talk-us] Freeway directions

[stevea]

On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 3:39 PM, Brad Neuhauser 
<brad.neuhau...@gmail.com> wrote:


From 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_Highway_System#Primary_.28one-_and_two-digit.29_routes_.28contiguous_U.S..29 
:


"In the numbering scheme, east-west highways are assigned even 
numbers and north-south highways are assigned odd numbers. Odd route 
numbers increase from west to east, and even-numbered routes 
increase from south to north (to avoid confusion with the U.S. 
Highways, which increase from east to west and north to south), 
though there are exceptions to both principles in several locations."



Field signage is sometimes inconsistent with the official rules; for 
example, US 68 is mostly (entirely?) signed north-south, and I-69 
becomes east-west between Lansing and Port Huron.  States may have 
their own rules; some states (MS, FL) follow the even-odd rules that 
the national routes do, some use an opposite pattern (even N-S, odd 
E-W), and some have no pattern at all (GA, TN).


There are also cases of signage by loop nesting ("inner" 
clockwise/"outer" counterclockwise for RHD) - I-495 around 
Washington and I-440 around Raleigh NC are examples, along with GA 
10 Loop around Athens GA. And in Canada the QEW is "directionally" 
signed by destination (Toronto on the clockwise carriageway, Niagara 
and then Fort Erie on the counterclockwise one). There may be a few 
more oddballs I've missed.



IMO preferred practice should be a relation for each continuous 
cardinal direction, to keep validation simple; undivided roads 
should use forward/backward roles to distinguish which relation 
applies to the underlying way's forward/backward traversal. It 
shouldn't be too terribly hard to come up with an algorithm to fixup 
the existing single-relation cases, particularly for the ones where 
the routes are entirely dual carriageway, although occasionally the 
heuristics will be wrong and need a manual edit.


Well said, Chris.  +1, lands right in the middle of where it might, imho.

Manual edits on exceptional cases means that somebody, somewhere is 
paying attention.  In a big set, with careful management, that's to 
be expected.  Good show.


Encore, author.  This is a serious project which aims to accurately 
map "what is."  Nice job so far, everybody.  I very much like this 
crowd-sourced map.  It only keeps getting better and better.


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

Re: [Talk-us] Freeway directions

[James Mast]

Chris, the QEW has three "destinations" on the counterclockwise direction.  In 
addition to having Niagara and Fort Erie, between Toronto and Hamilton, it's 
posted for Hamilton.  After Hamilton, it then becomes Niagara.  I should know, 
I've traveled the QEW several times in my life.

-James

From: lordsu...@gmail.com
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2013 18:59:58 -0400
To: talk-us@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Freeway directions

On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 3:39 PM, Brad Neuhauser  
wrote:


>From 
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_Highway_System#Primary_.28one-_and_two-digit.29_routes_.28contiguous_U.S..29
> :




"In the numbering scheme, east-west highways are assigned even numbers 
and north-south highways are assigned odd numbers. Odd route numbers 
increase from west to east, and even-numbered routes increase from south
 to north (to avoid confusion with the U.S. Highways, which increase 
from east to west and north to south), though there are exceptions to 
both principles in several locations."Field signage is sometimes inconsistent 
with the official rules; for example, US 68 is mostly (entirely?) signed 
north-south, and I-69 becomes east-west between Lansing and Port Huron.  States 
may have their own rules; some states (MS, FL) follow the even-odd rules that 
the national routes do, some use an opposite pattern (even N-S, odd E-W), and 
some have no pattern at all (GA, TN).


There are also cases of signage by loop nesting ("inner" clockwise/"outer" 
counterclockwise for RHD) - I-495 around Washington and I-440 around Raleigh NC 
are examples, along with GA 10 Loop around Athens GA. And in Canada the QEW is 
"directionally" signed by destination (Toronto on the clockwise carriageway, 
Niagara and then Fort Erie on the counterclockwise one). There may be a few 
more oddballs I've missed.



IMO preferred practice should be a relation for each continuous cardinal 
direction, to keep validation simple; undivided roads should use 
forward/backward roles to distinguish which relation applies to the underlying 
way's forward/backward traversal. It shouldn't be too terribly hard to come up 
with an algorithm to fixup the existing single-relation cases, particularly for 
the ones where the routes are entirely dual carriageway, although occasionally 
the heuristics will be wrong and need a manual edit.



Chris


___
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] Freeway directions

[Chris Lawrence]

On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 3:39 PM, Brad Neuhauser wrote:

> From
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_Highway_System#Primary_.28one-_and_two-digit.29_routes_.28contiguous_U.S..29:
>
> "In the numbering scheme, east-west highways are assigned even numbers and
> north-south highways are assigned odd numbers. Odd route numbers increase
> from west to east, and even-numbered routes increase from south to north
> (to avoid confusion with the U.S. Highways, which increase from east to
> west and north to south), though there are exceptions to both principles in
> several locations."
>

Field signage is sometimes inconsistent with the official rules; for
example, US 68 is mostly (entirely?) signed north-south, and I-69 becomes
east-west between Lansing and Port Huron.  States may have their own rules;
some states (MS, FL) follow the even-odd rules that the national routes do,
some use an opposite pattern (even N-S, odd E-W), and some have no pattern
at all (GA, TN).

There are also cases of signage by loop nesting ("inner" clockwise/"outer"
counterclockwise for RHD) - I-495 around Washington and I-440 around
Raleigh NC are examples, along with GA 10 Loop around Athens GA. And in
Canada the QEW is "directionally" signed by destination (Toronto on the
clockwise carriageway, Niagara and then Fort Erie on the counterclockwise
one). There may be a few more oddballs I've missed.

IMO preferred practice should be a relation for each continuous cardinal
direction, to keep validation simple; undivided roads should use
forward/backward roles to distinguish which relation applies to the
underlying way's forward/backward traversal. It shouldn't be too terribly
hard to come up with an algorithm to fixup the existing single-relation
cases, particularly for the ones where the routes are entirely dual
carriageway, although occasionally the heuristics will be wrong and need a
manual edit.


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

Re: [Talk-us] Freeway directions

[stevea]

Saikrishna Arcot wrote:


Just to add, three-digit routes tend to be either regional or be
loop-shaped, where the designated direction changes.



On Thu 17 Oct 2013 03:40:07 PM EDT, Ian Dees wrote:
 > On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 2:31 PM, Martijn van Exel 

 Yea, I realized that as well. There's even a section of I-80 / I-580
 in Berkeley, CA where the directionality of I-80 and I-580 is
 opposite... http://goo.gl/maps/XROab (The actual compass direction is
 more like N/S on that stretch.)

 I don't know if there's a definitive reference for the 'official'

 > directionality of the freeways?


(Sorry, meant to send this to the list yesterday):
I am not pointing to an authoritative source of Interstate numbering, 
though I believe this to be accurate or at least very close:  it is 
my understanding that in three-digit routes xyz, these are "belt" or 
"spur" routes off of the yz route, where x=even means belt and x=odd 
means spur (single connection "back to" or "out from" the parent yz 
route).  A belt has two connections to the parent route, but I'm not 
positive if that is exactly two or not.


We have an example in California in the South Bay (area of San 
Francisco) of 280 and 680 (together) being a belt that connects to 80 
(twice, well, almost twice).  The split between these two happens 
"sort of conveniently" at US-101.


Yes, E-W even and N-S odd is correct.  Furthermore, routes ending in 
0 or 5 are "major" routes.


Remember, directions are for long-distance motorways (Interstate 
freeways, in local parlance).  A bit of local wander in an "off" 
direction happens to a lot of roads.  Many of these are 
direction-specific routed roads.  That's OK, consider these a "local 
bend in the road."  We have roads here signed north which go south. 
That just means we have geography (coastlines, mountains, et cetera) 
together with "get me from San Francisco to New Jersey on a single 
named road."


80/580 through Berkeley are an especially wild example of this.  It's 
just local geography messing with long-distance cardinal direction 
routing.  It does that!


SteveA
California

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

Re: [Talk-us] Freeway directions

[Evin Fairchild]

This is not a concern in WA, there's no state highways that have the same
number as US or Interstate highways.

-compdude


On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 10:31 PM, Eric Fischer  wrote:

> California gives State, US, and Interstate roads unique signed numbers
> within the state, but not all states do. Interstate 64 in southern Indiana
> is close enough to State Road 64 to cause frequent confusion.
>
> Eric
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 8:52 PM, Tod Fitch  wrote:
>
>> On Oct 17, 2013, at 6:11 PM, Nathan Mills wrote:
>>
>> > On 10/17/2013 1:03 PM, Richard Welty wrote:
>> >
>> > If my GPS tells me to "turn right at the entrance to East Interstate
>> Whatever" and the sign says "North Interstate Whatever," I'm going to be
>> confused and wonder if I'm actually making the correct turn. Even more so
>> if it's a printed list of directions.
>> >
>>
>> I can't say for the urban auxiliary (three digit) freeways, but the
>> single and double digit Interstates all seem to have on ramp signs that use
>> their nominal direction rather than the compass direction at that
>> particular location. At least that is my understanding from what I've read
>> about the rules and conventions that are supposed to be used and I have
>> never noticed an exception.
>>
>> For what it is worth, it is my understanding that within a state the use
>> of a particular number, at least outside of triple digit urban beltways and
>> penetration Interstates, is supposed to be unique. So if I-10 goes through
>> your state, there will be no US10 nor a state highway 10. I haven't paid
>> much attention to this in other states I've visited but it seems to hold
>> true for California. If true throughout the US then it could be used to
>> help validate highway route numbers.
>>
>> Confusion in California comes in two flavors: In Southern California
>> there is a popular tendency to call freeways by a name (e.g. "The Ventura")
>> and use the actual direction the road goes for that named segment
>> (east/west for the Ventura) when giving directions. But the named segment
>> might be on a US or Interstate with a different nominal direction. This bit
>> me years ago when we were mailing out wedding directions and I assumed the
>> on ramp from the hotel area would be labeled for the eastbound Ventura
>> Freeway when, upon checking, it turned out to be labeled for southbound
>> US101.
>>
>> In the San Francisco Bay Area the confusion comes from the fact that the
>> only Interstate to enter the area is I-80. So all the urban auxiliary
>> (three digit) freeways have to have a suffix of 80 (even number implying
>> east/west) even if the road is north/south. So we have 280, 580, 680, 880,
>> etc. all going in different directions. Southern California avoids this by
>> having I-5, I-8, I-10 and I-15 enter the area, so I-210 is basically
>> east/west while I-405 and I-215 are basically north/south.
>>
>> -Tod
>> ___
>> 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] Freeway directions

[Alexander Jones]

Tod Fitch wrote:

> For what it is worth, it is my understanding that within a state the use
> of a particular number, at least outside of triple digit urban beltways
> and penetration Interstates, is supposed to be unique. So if I-10 goes
> through your state, there will be no US10 nor a state highway 10. I
> haven't paid much attention to this in other states I've visited but it
> seems to hold true for California. If true throughout the US then it could
> be used to help validate highway route numbers.

That's more of an exception rather than a rule. There's a Texas State 
Highway 10 near Fort Worth, despite us also having an Interstate 10.

-Alexander



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

Re: [Talk-us] Freeway directions

[Eric Fischer]

California gives State, US, and Interstate roads unique signed numbers
within the state, but not all states do. Interstate 64 in southern Indiana
is close enough to State Road 64 to cause frequent confusion.

Eric


On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 8:52 PM, Tod Fitch  wrote:

> On Oct 17, 2013, at 6:11 PM, Nathan Mills wrote:
>
> > On 10/17/2013 1:03 PM, Richard Welty wrote:
> >
> > If my GPS tells me to "turn right at the entrance to East Interstate
> Whatever" and the sign says "North Interstate Whatever," I'm going to be
> confused and wonder if I'm actually making the correct turn. Even more so
> if it's a printed list of directions.
> >
>
> I can't say for the urban auxiliary (three digit) freeways, but the single
> and double digit Interstates all seem to have on ramp signs that use their
> nominal direction rather than the compass direction at that particular
> location. At least that is my understanding from what I've read about the
> rules and conventions that are supposed to be used and I have never noticed
> an exception.
>
> For what it is worth, it is my understanding that within a state the use
> of a particular number, at least outside of triple digit urban beltways and
> penetration Interstates, is supposed to be unique. So if I-10 goes through
> your state, there will be no US10 nor a state highway 10. I haven't paid
> much attention to this in other states I've visited but it seems to hold
> true for California. If true throughout the US then it could be used to
> help validate highway route numbers.
>
> Confusion in California comes in two flavors: In Southern California there
> is a popular tendency to call freeways by a name (e.g. "The Ventura") and
> use the actual direction the road goes for that named segment (east/west
> for the Ventura) when giving directions. But the named segment might be on
> a US or Interstate with a different nominal direction. This bit me years
> ago when we were mailing out wedding directions and I assumed the on ramp
> from the hotel area would be labeled for the eastbound Ventura Freeway
> when, upon checking, it turned out to be labeled for southbound US101.
>
> In the San Francisco Bay Area the confusion comes from the fact that the
> only Interstate to enter the area is I-80. So all the urban auxiliary
> (three digit) freeways have to have a suffix of 80 (even number implying
> east/west) even if the road is north/south. So we have 280, 580, 680, 880,
> etc. all going in different directions. Southern California avoids this by
> having I-5, I-8, I-10 and I-15 enter the area, so I-210 is basically
> east/west while I-405 and I-215 are basically north/south.
>
> -Tod
> ___
> 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] Freeway directions

[Tod Fitch]

On Oct 17, 2013, at 6:11 PM, Nathan Mills wrote:

> On 10/17/2013 1:03 PM, Richard Welty wrote:
> 
> If my GPS tells me to "turn right at the entrance to East Interstate 
> Whatever" and the sign says "North Interstate Whatever," I'm going to be 
> confused and wonder if I'm actually making the correct turn. Even more so if 
> it's a printed list of directions.
> 

I can't say for the urban auxiliary (three digit) freeways, but the single and 
double digit Interstates all seem to have on ramp signs that use their nominal 
direction rather than the compass direction at that particular location. At 
least that is my understanding from what I've read about the rules and 
conventions that are supposed to be used and I have never noticed an exception.

For what it is worth, it is my understanding that within a state the use of a 
particular number, at least outside of triple digit urban beltways and 
penetration Interstates, is supposed to be unique. So if I-10 goes through your 
state, there will be no US10 nor a state highway 10. I haven't paid much 
attention to this in other states I've visited but it seems to hold true for 
California. If true throughout the US then it could be used to help validate 
highway route numbers.

Confusion in California comes in two flavors: In Southern California there is a 
popular tendency to call freeways by a name (e.g. "The Ventura") and use the 
actual direction the road goes for that named segment (east/west for the 
Ventura) when giving directions. But the named segment might be on a US or 
Interstate with a different nominal direction. This bit me years ago when we 
were mailing out wedding directions and I assumed the on ramp from the hotel 
area would be labeled for the eastbound Ventura Freeway when, upon checking, it 
turned out to be labeled for southbound US101.

In the San Francisco Bay Area the confusion comes from the fact that the only 
Interstate to enter the area is I-80. So all the urban auxiliary (three digit) 
freeways have to have a suffix of 80 (even number implying east/west) even if 
the road is north/south. So we have 280, 580, 680, 880, etc. all going in 
different directions. Southern California avoids this by having I-5, I-8, I-10 
and I-15 enter the area, so I-210 is basically east/west while I-405 and I-215 
are basically north/south.

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

Re: [Talk-us] Freeway directions

[Nathan Mills]

On 10/17/2013 1:03 PM, Richard Welty wrote:

hmmm. we're using exit_to (i think) for off ramps, maybe we need
entrance_to for on ramps

the value would be more or less exactly the text visible on the
signage.



This makes the most sense to me as the solution for the specific use 
case Martijn is asking about, where the tag value will be used as the 
basis for generating directions which the user will expect to be 
consistent with signage. The directional tag on a wayfinding sign at the 
motorway entrance may or may not correspond to the bannered direction of 
the route or route segment.


If my GPS tells me to "turn right at the entrance to East Interstate 
Whatever" and the sign says "North Interstate Whatever," I'm going to be 
confused and wonder if I'm actually making the correct turn. Even more 
so if it's a printed list of directions.


Being able to include control cities as well as cardinality is a nice 
bonus, also.


FWIW, I have in the past typically done one relation for both directions 
with the bannered cardinal direction in the segments' role tag, if it is 
bannered, or forward/reverse otherwise. I settled on that for my own 
work because it plays well with non-motorways that are sometimes divided 
and sometimes not. There's not really any logical reason two relations 
and a super relation couldn't be used in that scenario. It just seems 
somehow less elegant to me to have the extra relations when most of the 
route is undivided.


-Nathan

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

Re: [Talk-us] Freeway directions

[Martijn van Exel]

Thanks for all your input. For the interstates it seems to be somewhat
straightforward, at least for the two digit ones as Ian indicated. It
gets tricky when you enter the realm of three-digiters and US and
state routes... That is where explicit directionality would be
helpful.

If we were to dig up a definitive resource for the cardinal directions
*as signposted* somehow, I see two ways to proceed:
1) continuing the apparently increasingly (?) popular (and to me,
sensible) creation of relations per direction and tagging each with
direction=[N|S|E|W], splitting up the rarer cases where freeways don't
have one single signposted cardinal direction.
2) tagging exising relation members consistently with role=[N|S|E|W].

I much prefer 1) but I am still not convinced I am not overlooking
another (better) mapping practice?

Martijn

On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 1:48 PM, Saikrishna Arcot  wrote:
> Just to add, three-digit routes tend to be either regional or be
> loop-shaped, where the designated direction changes.
>
> Saikrishna Arcot
>
> On Thu 17 Oct 2013 03:40:07 PM EDT, Ian Dees wrote:
>> On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 2:31 PM, Martijn van Exel > > wrote:
>>
>> Yea, I realized that as well. There's even a section of I-80 / I-580
>> in Berkeley, CA where the directionality of I-80 and I-580 is
>> opposite... http://goo.gl/maps/XROab (The actual compass direction is
>> more like N/S on that stretch.)
>>
>> I don't know if there's a definitive reference for the 'official'
>> directionality of the freeways?
>>
>>
>> I'm sure someone will pipe up with more authoritative answers, but as
>> far as I know interstates can only be east/west or north/south.
>> North/south roads are odd numbered and east/west are even.
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-us mailing list
>> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us



-- 
--
Martijn van Exel
OSM data specialist
Telenav
http://www.osm.org/user/mvexel
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Mvexel
http://hdyc.neis-one.org/?mvexel

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

Re: [Talk-us] Freeway directions

[Kevin Kenny]

On 10/17/2013 03:21 PM, Richard Welty wrote:

On 10/17/13 3:14 PM, Ian Dees wrote:
The direction of a US Interstate isn't necessarily the compass 
direction of the road.


For example, this chunk of I-94 is "facing" south, but it's still 
eastbound I-94.


http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/33098899

this is true of many roads, not just interstates. there's one NY state 
route

in the Adirondacks that is C shaped, so it's official "direction" is only
true for one of the three legs.

richard


Closer to home for you and me, there's the little stretch coming north 
off Exit 25 of the NY State Thruway that is signed I-890 West and NY-7 East.


--
73 de ke9tv/2, Kevin

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

Re: [Talk-us] Freeway directions

[Saikrishna Arcot]

Just to add, three-digit routes tend to be either regional or be 
loop-shaped, where the designated direction changes.

Saikrishna Arcot

On Thu 17 Oct 2013 03:40:07 PM EDT, Ian Dees wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 2:31 PM, Martijn van Exel  > wrote:
>
> Yea, I realized that as well. There's even a section of I-80 / I-580
> in Berkeley, CA where the directionality of I-80 and I-580 is
> opposite... http://goo.gl/maps/XROab (The actual compass direction is
> more like N/S on that stretch.)
>
> I don't know if there's a definitive reference for the 'official'
> directionality of the freeways?
>
>
> I'm sure someone will pipe up with more authoritative answers, but as
> far as I know interstates can only be east/west or north/south.
> North/south roads are odd numbered and east/west are even.
>
>
> ___
> 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] Freeway directions

[Brad Neuhauser]

From
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_Highway_System#Primary_.28one-_and_two-digit.29_routes_.28contiguous_U.S..29:

"In the numbering scheme, east-west highways are assigned even numbers and
north-south highways are assigned odd numbers. Odd route numbers increase
from west to east, and even-numbered routes increase from south to north
(to avoid confusion with the U.S. Highways, which increase from east to
west and north to south), though there are exceptions to both principles in
several locations."


On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 2:31 PM, Martijn van Exel  wrote:

> Yea, I realized that as well. There's even a section of I-80 / I-580
> in Berkeley, CA where the directionality of I-80 and I-580 is
> opposite... http://goo.gl/maps/XROab (The actual compass direction is
> more like N/S on that stretch.)
>
> I don't know if there's a definitive reference for the 'official'
> directionality of the freeways?
>
> On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 12:21 PM, Richard Welty 
> wrote:
> > On 10/17/13 3:14 PM, Ian Dees wrote:
> >
> > The direction of a US Interstate isn't necessarily the compass direction
> of
> > the road.
> >
> > For example, this chunk of I-94 is "facing" south, but it's still
> eastbound
> > I-94.
> >
> > http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/33098899
> >
> > this is true of many roads, not just interstates. there's one NY state
> route
> > in the Adirondacks that is C shaped, so it's official "direction" is only
> > true for one of the three legs.
> >
> > richard
> >
> >
> > ___
> > Talk-us mailing list
> > Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Martijn van Exel
> http://oegeo.wordpress.com/
> http://openstreetmap.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] Freeway directions

[John F. Eldredge]

Ian Dees  wrote:
> The direction of a US Interstate isn't necessarily the compass
> direction of
> the road.
> 
> For example, this chunk of I-94 is "facing" south, but it's still
> eastbound
> I-94.
> 
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/33098899
> 
> 
> On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 1:03 PM, Richard Welty
> wrote:
> 
> > On 10/17/13 1:52 PM, Martijn van Exel wrote:
> > > The use case would be to distinguish between onramps in routing
> and
> > > guidance. The onramp entrances can be close together, so it helps
> > > tremendously if you can say 'turn right onto Interstate 215 West'
> > > instead of just 'turn right onto Interstate 215'.
> > >
> > hmmm. we're using exit_to (i think) for off ramps, maybe we need
> > entrance_to for on ramps
> >
> > the value would be more or less exactly the text visible on the
> > signage.
> >
> > richard
> >
> >
> >
> > ___
> > 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

Another example would be Interstate 24.  It nominally runs East/West, but the 
actual alignment is Southeast/Northwest.

-- 
John F. Eldredge -- j...@jfeldredge.com
"Darkness cannot drive out darkness: only light can do that.
Hate cannot drive out hate: only love can do that."
Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Freeway directions

[Ian Dees]

On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 2:31 PM, Martijn van Exel  wrote:

> Yea, I realized that as well. There's even a section of I-80 / I-580
> in Berkeley, CA where the directionality of I-80 and I-580 is
> opposite... http://goo.gl/maps/XROab (The actual compass direction is
> more like N/S on that stretch.)
>
> I don't know if there's a definitive reference for the 'official'
> directionality of the freeways?


I'm sure someone will pipe up with more authoritative answers, but as far
as I know interstates can only be east/west or north/south. North/south
roads are odd numbered and east/west are even.
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Freeway directions

[Martijn van Exel]

Yea, I realized that as well. There's even a section of I-80 / I-580
in Berkeley, CA where the directionality of I-80 and I-580 is
opposite... http://goo.gl/maps/XROab (The actual compass direction is
more like N/S on that stretch.)

I don't know if there's a definitive reference for the 'official'
directionality of the freeways?

On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 12:21 PM, Richard Welty  wrote:
> On 10/17/13 3:14 PM, Ian Dees wrote:
>
> The direction of a US Interstate isn't necessarily the compass direction of
> the road.
>
> For example, this chunk of I-94 is "facing" south, but it's still eastbound
> I-94.
>
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/33098899
>
> this is true of many roads, not just interstates. there's one NY state route
> in the Adirondacks that is C shaped, so it's official "direction" is only
> true for one of the three legs.
>
> richard
>
>
> ___
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>



-- 
Martijn van Exel
http://oegeo.wordpress.com/
http://openstreetmap.us/

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

Re: [Talk-us] Freeway directions

[Tod Fitch]

True also of the westbound Ventura Freeway in Los Angeles which is officially 
US101 North.

There is a portion of I10 through Phoenix which runs north/south too.

Tod

-- 
Sent from my mobile device. Please excuse my brevity.

Ian Dees  wrote:
>The direction of a US Interstate isn't necessarily the compass
>direction of
>the road.
>
>For example, this chunk of I-94 is "facing" south, but it's still
>eastbound
>I-94.
>
>http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/33098899
>
>
>On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 1:03 PM, Richard Welty
>wrote:
>
>> On 10/17/13 1:52 PM, Martijn van Exel wrote:
>> > The use case would be to distinguish between onramps in routing and
>> > guidance. The onramp entrances can be close together, so it helps
>> > tremendously if you can say 'turn right onto Interstate 215 West'
>> > instead of just 'turn right onto Interstate 215'.
>> >
>> hmmm. we're using exit_to (i think) for off ramps, maybe we need
>> entrance_to for on ramps
>>
>> the value would be more or less exactly the text visible on the
>> signage.
>>
>> richard
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> 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] Freeway directions

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On Thu, Oct 17, 2013, at 02:14 PM, Ian Dees wrote:
> The direction of a US Interstate isn't necessarily the compass direction
> of the road.

However, in some cases the directions change as the highway goes on,
especially for loops: I-610 in Houston, Texas, changes from north/south
to east/west to south/north to west/east as you go around. (Same for
Beltway 8/Sam Houston Tollway, for that matter.)

-- 
  Shawn K. Quinn
  skqu...@rushpost.com


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

Re: [Talk-us] Freeway directions

[Tod Fitch]

One could argue that even two lane highways could benefit from directional 
relations.

http://shields.aaroads.com/blog/photos/056747.jpg

It is unlikely that all access to these types of roads could be tagged. And it 
might be nice if the routing software says you should be on US 101 South and 
you see a sign like the linked one you know you have a problem.

Tod

-- 
Sent from my mobile device. Please excuse my brevity.

Richard Welty  wrote:
>On 10/17/13 1:52 PM, Martijn van Exel wrote:
>> The use case would be to distinguish between onramps in routing and
>> guidance. The onramp entrances can be close together, so it helps
>> tremendously if you can say 'turn right onto Interstate 215 West'
>> instead of just 'turn right onto Interstate 215'.
>>
>hmmm. we're using exit_to (i think) for off ramps, maybe we need
>entrance_to for on ramps
>
>the value would be more or less exactly the text visible on the
>signage.
>
>richard
>
>
>
>
>
>
>___
>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] Freeway directions

[Richard Welty]

On 10/17/13 3:14 PM, Ian Dees wrote:
> The direction of a US Interstate isn't necessarily the compass
> direction of the road.
>
> For example, this chunk of I-94 is "facing" south, but it's still
> eastbound I-94.
>
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/33098899
>
this is true of many roads, not just interstates. there's one NY state route
in the Adirondacks that is C shaped, so it's official "direction" is only
true for one of the three legs.

richard



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Freeway directions

[Ian Dees]

The direction of a US Interstate isn't necessarily the compass direction of
the road.

For example, this chunk of I-94 is "facing" south, but it's still eastbound
I-94.

http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/33098899


On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 1:03 PM, Richard Welty wrote:

> On 10/17/13 1:52 PM, Martijn van Exel wrote:
> > The use case would be to distinguish between onramps in routing and
> > guidance. The onramp entrances can be close together, so it helps
> > tremendously if you can say 'turn right onto Interstate 215 West'
> > instead of just 'turn right onto Interstate 215'.
> >
> hmmm. we're using exit_to (i think) for off ramps, maybe we need
> entrance_to for on ramps
>
> the value would be more or less exactly the text visible on the
> signage.
>
> richard
>
>
>
> ___
> 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] Freeway directions

[Richard Welty]

On 10/17/13 1:52 PM, Martijn van Exel wrote:
> The use case would be to distinguish between onramps in routing and
> guidance. The onramp entrances can be close together, so it helps
> tremendously if you can say 'turn right onto Interstate 215 West'
> instead of just 'turn right onto Interstate 215'.
>
hmmm. we're using exit_to (i think) for off ramps, maybe we need
entrance_to for on ramps

the value would be more or less exactly the text visible on the
signage.

richard




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Freeway directions

[Martijn van Exel]

The use case would be to distinguish between onramps in routing and
guidance. The onramp entrances can be close together, so it helps
tremendously if you can say 'turn right onto Interstate 215 West'
instead of just 'turn right onto Interstate 215'.

On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 10:33 AM, Richard Welty  wrote:
> On 10/17/13 12:45 PM, Martijn van Exel wrote:
>> I actually think this is more elegant, to create separate relations
>> for the directions, but I don't know how common it is.
>> Looking at http://maproulette.org/relationpages/interstates.html
>> (which I see does no longer get automatically updated..need to look
>> into that) I see a mix of both combined and split relations.
>>
> i like separate relations for opposite directions, but i don't feel a need
> to obsess with points of the compass. include N/S or E/W if it makes sense,
> but otherwise i'm not sure there's a valid use case for these that we need
> to worry about.
>
> richard
>
>
>
> ___
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>



-- 
--
Martijn van Exel
OSM data specialist
Telenav
http://www.osm.org/user/mvexel
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Mvexel
http://hdyc.neis-one.org/?mvexel

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

Re: [Talk-us] Freeway directions

[Richard Welty]

On 10/17/13 12:45 PM, Martijn van Exel wrote:
> I actually think this is more elegant, to create separate relations
> for the directions, but I don't know how common it is.
> Looking at http://maproulette.org/relationpages/interstates.html
> (which I see does no longer get automatically updated..need to look
> into that) I see a mix of both combined and split relations.
>
i like separate relations for opposite directions, but i don't feel a need
to obsess with points of the compass. include N/S or E/W if it makes sense,
but otherwise i'm not sure there's a valid use case for these that we need
to worry about.

richard




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Freeway directions

[Martijn van Exel]

I actually think this is more elegant, to create separate relations
for the directions, but I don't know how common it is.
Looking at http://maproulette.org/relationpages/interstates.html
(which I see does no longer get automatically updated..need to look
into that) I see a mix of both combined and split relations.

If we were to split by direction, how would we handle a beltway cases
like http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/1694951 ? This one
changes direction from E/W to N/S about four times. I would actually
not mind having a relation for each cardinal direction stretch and a
super-relation for the two overall directions, and one super on top of
that for the entire freeway.

How do people like the idea of splitting the route relations by
direction like that?

On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 4:32 PM, Tod Fitch  wrote:
> The only freeways I've looked at (I-5, I-10, I-15, CA-85), all in
> California, have relations for the direction and then a super relation for
> whole thing.
>
> Tod
>
> --
> Sent from my mobile device. Please excuse my brevity.
>
>
> Martijn van Exel  wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> What is the preferred way to indicate the direction of a motorway, for
>> example I-215 Eastbound?
>>
>> I know of at least two possible tags that can be used, there may be
>> more: the direction tag on the relation and the role tag on the
>> relation members. The former to me seems easier to maintain (only one
>> tag per relation instead of a tag on all members), but the latter
>> looks to be (much) more prevalent. My guess this is because of the
>> practice to combine both directions of one freeway in one relation
>> rather than having two relations for the separate directions.



-- 
Martijn van Exel
http://oegeo.wordpress.com/
http://openstreetmap.us/

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

Re: [Talk-us] Freeway directions

[Tod Fitch]

The only freeways I've looked at (I-5, I-10, I-15, CA-85), all in California, 
have relations for the direction and then a super relation for whole thing.

Tod

-- 
Sent from my mobile device. Please excuse my brevity.

Martijn van Exel  wrote:
>Hi all,
>
>What is the preferred way to indicate the direction of a motorway, for
>example I-215 Eastbound?
>
>I know of at least two possible tags that can be used, there may be
>more: the direction tag on the relation and the role tag on the
>relation members. The former to me seems easier to maintain (only one
>tag per relation instead of a tag on all members), but the latter
>looks to be (much) more prevalent. My guess this is because of the
>practice to combine both directions of one freeway in one relation
>rather than having two relations for the separate directions.
>-- 
>Martijn van Exel
>http://oegeo.wordpress.com/
>http://openstreetmap.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