Re: [Talk-us] Gosh ... something about mapping ...

[John Eldredge]

Non-motorized vehicles refers to vehicles that neither have a motor of 
their own or are towed or propelled by a motorized vehicle. Examples would 
be horse-drawn carriages, nonmotorized rickshaws, carts pulled by 
pedestrians, etc.


--
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." -- Martin Luther King, Jr.




On December 1, 2015 8:38:29 AM Elliott Plack  wrote:


Ben,

I believe you're right, nice catch! "Motor bicycles and scooters: Mopeds
should be included with motor-driven cycles (motor bicycles) in the States"
(
http://mrf.org/library2/index.php/legislation-language/definitions/definition-motorcycle/fhwa-reclassification-of-motorcycles/
)

Additionally the one about "Non-Motorized" vehicles is somewhat confusing
and I don't think that I've ever seen it used. A bicycle is non-motorized,
but so is the trailer on a truck. What does it mean?

Elliott

On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 9:23 AM Ben Miller  wrote:


I'm not familiar with the MUTCD, and a little Googling didn't get me any
clarification, but I'm guessing that "motor-driven cycles" refers to mopeds
and such, not to motorcycles.


On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 8:21 AM Simon Poole  wrote:


To give us all a break from the usual political machinations at this
time of year I've drawn up the following table


https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/US_MUTCD_exclusionary_signs_to_OSM_access

The context is the work I've been doing on
https://github.com/simonpoole/beautified-JOSM-preset which is the
default preset for Vespucci http://vespucci.io/ (obviously on mobile
devices being able to touch an icon is preferable to typing).

Any opinions on the mappings, and what would you consider signs that you
frequently map?

Feedback and patches welcome!

Simon


___
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


--
Elliott Plack
http://elliottplack.me



--
___
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] Gosh ... something about mapping ...

[John Eldredge]

Interstate highways (motorways, in UK terms) in the eastern USA often ban 
motor-driven cycles, bicycles, and other low-speed traffic. Mopeds are 
required to have a governor that limits them to a top speed of 25 miles per 
hour. In return, they don't require a driver's license to operate.


--
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." -- Martin Luther King, Jr.




On December 2, 2015 3:33:15 AM Simon Poole  wrote:


Well ... the definitions are very fuzzy  (this is just so that you are
aware that there is potential for conflict): mopeds* are in general just
low displacement motorcycles, historically with pedals , but that is
typically no longer a legal requirement. For example there are scooters
that fall in this class. Mofas on the other hand, where the class
exists, typically have a requirement for pedals (adding pedelecs in to
the mix just makes things more complicated so leaving that away for now).

Obviously a moped without pedals is fairly dead when the motor isn't
running :-)

Simon

* just to confuse things in Germany it is colloquially quite common to
refer to any motorcycle as "moped" (even my 1300cc beemer)

Am 02.12.2015 um 10:13 schrieb Paul Johnson:

On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 9:30 AM, Simon Poole > wrote:


I've changed the relevant tags to moped=no. Any opinion on if
mopeds would be included in "motor vehicles"? I don't think I've
ever seen a mofa in the states (I find people on Vespas in the
states already fairly brave) but what about pedelecs and similar?


A moped would qualify as both a motor vehicle and a bicycle, which it
is (and whether or not it can use bicycle lanes and cycleways) is
determined by whether or not the motor is running.


___
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] Gosh ... something about mapping ...

[Elliott Plack]

I've also been researching this with some local traffic engineers / road
fans. There are still instances of this sign being posted, mostly on dirt
roads where the DOT does not want tracked vehicles like bulldozers--or
tanks--to drive them.

That said, I don't see an applicable access restriction for tracked
vehicles on the OSM access tagging list.

On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 1:35 AM Greg Morgan  wrote:

> On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 8:45 AM, Harald Kliems  wrote:
>
>> Very useful, Simon. Thanks!
>>
>> Slightly OT: Can anybody explain what R5-5, "No vehicles with lugs"
>> means? I'm assuming it doesn't refer to vehicles like this
>> http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_MyBrrEGexIg/TEIogw5nrdI/AFk/Jl7SF5tfQV0/s1600/L9990154.JPG
>>
>>
>>
>>>
> You made me look...
>
> In the early years of the 20th century, hard-surface roads often had signs
> that read: “Tractors with Lugs Prohibited.”
>
> Those early tractors were built with steel wheels covered with piercing
> lugs that gouged every surface. I remember the signs on U.S. 63 south of
> Stewartville to Racine and then on Minnesota Highway 16 going west to Grand
> Meadow.
>
> By the late 1930s, tractors finally were being built with rubber tires
> that still gave field traction and speed, sometimes up to 20 mph on the
> road.
>
> ...
>
>
> http://www.postbulletin.com/news/local/tractors-with-lugs-were-dangerous/article_580aa04a-5d73-5de1-8139-7b402a63ba90.html
>
>
> ___
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>
-- 
Elliott Plack
http://elliottplack.me
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Gosh ... something about mapping ...

[Elliott Plack]

Reading from http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2011-04-28/html/2011-10258.htm

> The FHWA's current definition of a motorcycle is two-fold: (1)
Motorcycles, and (2) motor bicycles and scooters. The specific language
for defining motorcycles, provided in FHWA's Guide, follows:

>Item I.E.2. Motorcycles: This item includes two-wheeled and three-
wheeled motorcycles. Sidecars are not regarded as separate
vehicles--a motorcycle and sidecar are reported as a single unit.
>Item I.E.3. Motor bicycles and scooters: Mopeds should be included
with motor-driven cycles (motor bicycles) in the States that require
their registration.

The article goes on to say that the laws vary greatly by state when
defining what a moped is, so I suppose consumers of OSM routing restriction
data would need to be cognizant of the local laws, just as the users of the
roads in those states should be.

Laws that define a motor-driven cycle that list a max speed or engine
displacement (CC) may or may not include Mofas.

Perhaps put a caveat that restrictions vary by local law?

On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 4:32 AM Simon Poole  wrote:

> Well ... the definitions are very fuzzy  (this is just so that you are
> aware that there is potential for conflict): mopeds* are in general just
> low displacement motorcycles, historically with pedals , but that is
> typically no longer a legal requirement. For example there are scooters
> that fall in this class. Mofas on the other hand, where the class exists,
> typically have a requirement for pedals (adding pedelecs in to the mix just
> makes things more complicated so leaving that away for now).
>
> Obviously a moped without pedals is fairly dead when the motor isn't
> running :-)
>
> Simon
>
> * just to confuse things in Germany it is colloquially quite common to
> refer to any motorcycle as "moped" (even my 1300cc beemer)
>
>
> Am 02.12.2015 um 10:13 schrieb Paul Johnson:
>
> On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 9:30 AM, Simon Poole  wrote:
>
>>
>> I've changed the relevant tags to moped=no. Any opinion on if mopeds
>> would be included in "motor vehicles"? I don't think I've ever seen a mofa
>> in the states (I find people on Vespas in the states already fairly brave)
>> but what about pedelecs and similar?
>>
>
> A moped would qualify as both a motor vehicle and a bicycle, which it is
> (and whether or not it can use bicycle lanes and cycleways) is determined
> by whether or not the motor is running.
>
>
> ___
> Talk-us mailing 
> listTalk-us@openstreetmap.orghttps://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>
>
> ___
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>
-- 
Elliott Plack
http://elliottplack.me
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Gosh ... something about mapping ...

[Paul Johnson]

On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 9:45 AM, Harald Kliems  wrote:

> Very useful, Simon. Thanks!
>
> Slightly OT: Can anybody explain what R5-5, "No vehicles with lugs" means?
> I'm assuming it doesn't refer to vehicles like this
> http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_MyBrrEGexIg/TEIogw5nrdI/AFk/Jl7SF5tfQV0/s1600/L9990154.JPG
>
>

Usually is meant to mean vehicles whose (metal) tracks or wheels have
flanges, cleats, lugs or other projections that tend to tear up the
pavement.  The sign is somewhat obsolete now and goes back to when most
motor vehicles in America were metal-wheeled tractors with *huge* lugs that
were designed to sink deep into topsoil for traction (these days, most such
equipment is trailered or has rubber tires).
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Gosh ... something about mapping ...

[Paul Johnson]

On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 9:30 AM, Simon Poole  wrote:

>
> I've changed the relevant tags to moped=no. Any opinion on if mopeds would
> be included in "motor vehicles"? I don't think I've ever seen a mofa in the
> states (I find people on Vespas in the states already fairly brave) but
> what about pedelecs and similar?
>

A moped would qualify as both a motor vehicle and a bicycle, which it is
(and whether or not it can use bicycle lanes and cycleways) is determined
by whether or not the motor is running.
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Gosh ... something about mapping ...

[Simon Poole]

Well ... the definitions are very fuzzy  (this is just so that you are
aware that there is potential for conflict): mopeds* are in general just
low displacement motorcycles, historically with pedals , but that is
typically no longer a legal requirement. For example there are scooters
that fall in this class. Mofas on the other hand, where the class
exists, typically have a requirement for pedals (adding pedelecs in to
the mix just makes things more complicated so leaving that away for now).

Obviously a moped without pedals is fairly dead when the motor isn't
running :-)

Simon

* just to confuse things in Germany it is colloquially quite common to
refer to any motorcycle as "moped" (even my 1300cc beemer)

Am 02.12.2015 um 10:13 schrieb Paul Johnson:
> On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 9:30 AM, Simon Poole  > wrote:
>
>
> I've changed the relevant tags to moped=no. Any opinion on if
> mopeds would be included in "motor vehicles"? I don't think I've
> ever seen a mofa in the states (I find people on Vespas in the
> states already fairly brave) but what about pedelecs and similar?
>
>
> A moped would qualify as both a motor vehicle and a bicycle, which it
> is (and whether or not it can use bicycle lanes and cycleways) is
> determined by whether or not the motor is running. 
>
>
> ___
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us



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

Re: [Talk-us] Gosh ... something about mapping ...

[Greg Morgan]

On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 8:45 AM, Harald Kliems  wrote:

> Very useful, Simon. Thanks!
>
> Slightly OT: Can anybody explain what R5-5, "No vehicles with lugs" means?
> I'm assuming it doesn't refer to vehicles like this
> http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_MyBrrEGexIg/TEIogw5nrdI/AFk/Jl7SF5tfQV0/s1600/L9990154.JPG
>
>
>
>>
You made me look...

In the early years of the 20th century, hard-surface roads often had signs
that read: “Tractors with Lugs Prohibited.”

Those early tractors were built with steel wheels covered with piercing
lugs that gouged every surface. I remember the signs on U.S. 63 south of
Stewartville to Racine and then on Minnesota Highway 16 going west to Grand
Meadow.

By the late 1930s, tractors finally were being built with rubber tires that
still gave field traction and speed, sometimes up to 20 mph on the road.

...

http://www.postbulletin.com/news/local/tractors-with-lugs-were-dangerous/article_580aa04a-5d73-5de1-8139-7b402a63ba90.html
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Gosh ... something about mapping ...

[Simon Poole]

Ben

See http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/

Your point is exactly why I'm asking for feedback. Particularly vehicle
classifications tend to differ quite a bit between countries, even in
those that are signatories to the Vienna convention (which the US is not).

Simon

Am 01.12.2015 um 15:22 schrieb Ben Miller:
> I'm not familiar with the MUTCD, and a little Googling didn't get me
> any clarification, but I'm guessing that "motor-driven cycles" refers
> to mopeds and such, not to motorcycles.
>
> On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 8:21 AM Simon Poole  > wrote:
>
> To give us all a break from the usual political machinations at this
> time of year I've drawn up the following table
>
> 
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/US_MUTCD_exclusionary_signs_to_OSM_access
>
> The context is the work I've been doing on
> https://github.com/simonpoole/beautified-JOSM-preset which is the
> default preset for Vespucci http://vespucci.io/ (obviously on mobile
> devices being able to touch an icon is preferable to typing).
>
> Any opinions on the mappings, and what would you consider signs
> that you
> frequently map?
>
> Feedback and patches welcome!
>
> Simon
>
>
> ___
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org 
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>



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

Re: [Talk-us] Gosh ... something about mapping ...

[Simon Poole]

I've changed the relevant tags to moped=no. Any opinion on if mopeds
would be included in "motor vehicles"? I don't think I've ever seen a
mofa in the states (I find people on Vespas in the states already fairly
brave) but what about pedelecs and similar?

Simon

Am 01.12.2015 um 15:36 schrieb Elliott Plack:
> Ben,
>
> I believe you're right, nice catch! "Motor bicycles and scooters:
> Mopeds should be included with motor-driven cycles (motor bicycles) in
> the States"
> (http://mrf.org/library2/index.php/legislation-language/definitions/definition-motorcycle/fhwa-reclassification-of-motorcycles/)
>
> Additionally the one about "Non-Motorized" vehicles is somewhat
> confusing and I don't think that I've ever seen it used. A bicycle is
> non-motorized, but so is the trailer on a truck. What does it mean?
>
> Elliott
>
> On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 9:23 AM Ben Miller  > wrote:
>
> I'm not familiar with the MUTCD, and a little Googling didn't get
> me any clarification, but I'm guessing that "motor-driven cycles"
> refers to mopeds and such, not to motorcycles.
>
>
> On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 8:21 AM Simon Poole  > wrote:
>
> To give us all a break from the usual political machinations
> at this
> time of year I've drawn up the following table
>
> 
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/US_MUTCD_exclusionary_signs_to_OSM_access
>
> The context is the work I've been doing on
> https://github.com/simonpoole/beautified-JOSM-preset which is the
> default preset for Vespucci http://vespucci.io/ (obviously on
> mobile
> devices being able to touch an icon is preferable to typing).
>
> Any opinions on the mappings, and what would you consider
> signs that you
> frequently map?
>
> Feedback and patches welcome!
>
> Simon
>
>
> ___
> 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
>
> -- 
> Elliott Plack
> http://elliottplack.me 



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

Re: [Talk-us] Gosh ... something about mapping ...

[Harald Kliems]

Very useful, Simon. Thanks!

Slightly OT: Can anybody explain what R5-5, "No vehicles with lugs" means?
I'm assuming it doesn't refer to vehicles like this
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_MyBrrEGexIg/TEIogw5nrdI/AFk/Jl7SF5tfQV0/s1600/L9990154.JPG


 Harald.

On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 7:20 AM Simon Poole  wrote:

> To give us all a break from the usual political machinations at this
> time of year I've drawn up the following table
>
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/US_MUTCD_exclusionary_signs_to_OSM_access
>
> The context is the work I've been doing on
> https://github.com/simonpoole/beautified-JOSM-preset which is the
> default preset for Vespucci http://vespucci.io/ (obviously on mobile
> devices being able to touch an icon is preferable to typing).
>
> Any opinions on the mappings, and what would you consider signs that you
> frequently map?
>
> Feedback and patches welcome!
>
> Simon
>
>
> ___
> 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] Gosh ... something about mapping ...

[Elliott Plack]

Ben,

I believe you're right, nice catch! "Motor bicycles and scooters: Mopeds
should be included with motor-driven cycles (motor bicycles) in the States"
(
http://mrf.org/library2/index.php/legislation-language/definitions/definition-motorcycle/fhwa-reclassification-of-motorcycles/
)

Additionally the one about "Non-Motorized" vehicles is somewhat confusing
and I don't think that I've ever seen it used. A bicycle is non-motorized,
but so is the trailer on a truck. What does it mean?

Elliott

On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 9:23 AM Ben Miller  wrote:

> I'm not familiar with the MUTCD, and a little Googling didn't get me any
> clarification, but I'm guessing that "motor-driven cycles" refers to mopeds
> and such, not to motorcycles.
>
>
> On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 8:21 AM Simon Poole  wrote:
>
>> To give us all a break from the usual political machinations at this
>> time of year I've drawn up the following table
>>
>>
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/US_MUTCD_exclusionary_signs_to_OSM_access
>>
>> The context is the work I've been doing on
>> https://github.com/simonpoole/beautified-JOSM-preset which is the
>> default preset for Vespucci http://vespucci.io/ (obviously on mobile
>> devices being able to touch an icon is preferable to typing).
>>
>> Any opinions on the mappings, and what would you consider signs that you
>> frequently map?
>>
>> Feedback and patches welcome!
>>
>> Simon
>>
>>
>> ___
>> 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
>
-- 
Elliott Plack
http://elliottplack.me
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Gosh ... something about mapping ...

[Elliott Plack]

Simon,

Great work so far! I enjoy reading the MUTCD (nerd alert). I'll think of
some things to add. So far I think we could include the no hazmat signs (
http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2009/part2/fig2b_30_longdesc.htm) which are
governed by the key:hazmat tag (
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:hazmat).

I think that with more efforts these days to improve routing with street
signs (https://twitter.com/peterneubauer/status/671660804484239360), it
would be useful to create a 1:1 mapping of all MUTCD traffic control
devices. This list is a great starting point, as exclusions are important
to routing, and not typically observable via air photo.

Best,

Elliott

On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 8:20 AM Simon Poole  wrote:

> To give us all a break from the usual political machinations at this
> time of year I've drawn up the following table
>
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/US_MUTCD_exclusionary_signs_to_OSM_access
>
> The context is the work I've been doing on
> https://github.com/simonpoole/beautified-JOSM-preset which is the
> default preset for Vespucci http://vespucci.io/ (obviously on mobile
> devices being able to touch an icon is preferable to typing).
>
> Any opinions on the mappings, and what would you consider signs that you
> frequently map?
>
> Feedback and patches welcome!
>
> Simon
>
>
> ___
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>
-- 
Elliott Plack
http://elliottplack.me
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Gosh ... something about mapping ...

[Ben Miller]

I'm not familiar with the MUTCD, and a little Googling didn't get me any
clarification, but I'm guessing that "motor-driven cycles" refers to mopeds
and such, not to motorcycles.

On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 8:21 AM Simon Poole  wrote:

> To give us all a break from the usual political machinations at this
> time of year I've drawn up the following table
>
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/US_MUTCD_exclusionary_signs_to_OSM_access
>
> The context is the work I've been doing on
> https://github.com/simonpoole/beautified-JOSM-preset which is the
> default preset for Vespucci http://vespucci.io/ (obviously on mobile
> devices being able to touch an icon is preferable to typing).
>
> Any opinions on the mappings, and what would you consider signs that you
> frequently map?
>
> Feedback and patches welcome!
>
> Simon
>
>
> ___
> 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