Re: [Talk-us] NJ mass road demotions?

[Kevin Kenny]

On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 10:49 AM, Paul Johnson  wrote:
>  I only saw this since NE2 had mass-upgraded everything in the US highway
> system to trunk nationwide.  Typically, trunk in the US has been meant to
> mean an expressway, ie, basically a freeway, but it might have intersections
> (the midwest is full of these, Tesla's first autopilot crash happened on
> such an expressway).  Or it might be fully controlled, but only a single
> carriageway (Cimarron Turnpike).  Or it's dual carriageway, but only one
> lane on a carriageway (thankfully, this is rare, the only one I remember
> driving on appears to be 2+2 now).  Odd beasts that are more controlled than
> a primary, yet, not a freeway.

Yeah, 'trunk' and 'unclassified' are odd beasts in the US because we
don't really have legal classifications corresponding to the ones of
those names in several European countries.

I pretty much follow the same practice as you. Trunks that I'm aware
of having travelled include Taconic Parkway (most of the crossings are
now elevated, but grade crossings do remain and are quite hazardous),
US 7 in Vermont (crossings elevated, but the carriageway is usually
two lanes plus a climbing lane), Queens Boulevard in New York City (an
urban surface street, but with four median-separated carriageways) and
any number of urban ways with dual carriageways and 'major' crossings
elevated, but at-grade minor intersections and even driveways opening
on the way.

'Unclassified,' I wind up using as something of a catchall for "isn't
primarily residential, and serves the hinterland rather than
connecting two places" If a way is the main route, say, between two
villages, that's at least 'tertiary'. How the road is placarded hardly
enters into the equation. There are placarded and numbered county
roads around here that deserve every designation from 'track' to
'trunk'. I think I could still find placards on some county roads that
have been de facto abandoned since the 1940s and are grown to trees -
but remain public rights-of-way that the hiking clubs encourage people
to use on foot.

Anything 'unclassified' and higher, I explicitly tag surface and
smoothness if either is significant. "highway=tertiary
surface=compacted smoothness=very_bad" is not uncommon out in the
countryside. I'm less assiduous with 'track', which can be presumed
to have a less-than-friendly surface to drive on.

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

Re: [Talk-us] NJ mass road demotions?

[Paul Johnson]

On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 1:55 PM, Richard Fairhurst 
wrote:

> Kevin Kenny wrote:
> > Is there *anyone* that actually can speak to what *is* common
> > practice in the US? When I've asked, I've always drawn a lot of
> > replies and come away more confused than before.
>
> I've been doing vast amounts of rural TIGER fixup over the past couple of
> years and this is what broadly seems to be what I've seen, bearing in mind
> standard practice in other developed countries and the idea that the
> highway= tag combines the importance in the highway network with some
> assurance of construction quality:
>
> * highway=motorway: interstate or other long-distance restricted-access
> road
> * highway=trunk: fast, busy State Highway or US Highway, often NHS/STRAHNET


 I only saw this since NE2 had mass-upgraded everything in the US highway
system to trunk nationwide.  Typically, trunk in the US has been meant to
mean an expressway, ie, basically a freeway, but it might have
intersections (the midwest is full of these, Tesla's first autopilot crash
happened on such an expressway).  Or it might be fully controlled, but only
a single carriageway (Cimarron Turnpike).  Or it's dual carriageway, but
only one lane on a carriageway (thankfully, this is rare, the only one I
remember driving on appears to be 2+2 now).  Odd beasts that are more
controlled than a primary, yet, not a freeway.
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] NJ mass road demotions?

[Kevin Kenny]

On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 2:55 PM, Richard Fairhurst  wrote:
> * highway=motorway: interstate or other long-distance restricted-access road
> * highway=trunk: fast, busy State Highway or US Highway, often NHS/STRAHNET
> * highway=primary: major State Highway or US Highway
> * highway=secondary: other State Highway or major County Road
> * highway=tertiary: other through route, often a County Road, usually paved
> with centreline
> * highway=unclassified: rural minor route, sometimes a County Road, paved
> unless tagged otherwise
> * highway=residential: minor public road intended for residential access
> rather than through route, paved unless tagged otherwise
>   (N.B. currently not safe to assume paved in rural areas where
> tiger:reviewed=no)
> * highway=track: ungraded or rough, but usable by some four-wheeled vehicles

Sounds close to what I've been doing. I don't recall whether I tagged
the road in question as 'unclassified' or 'track' without looking it
up, but I certainly added smoothness=very_bad, surface=compacted,
vehicle:conditional=no @ snow. It's a numbered and placarded county
highway, but seasonal and limited use, and I wouldn't take a car with
low ground clearance on it even in dry weather.

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

Re: [Talk-us] NJ mass road demotions?

[Wolfgang Zenker]

* Richard Fairhurst  [170612 20:55]:
> Kevin Kenny wrote:
>> Is there *anyone* that actually can speak to what *is* common 
>> practice in the US? When I've asked, I've always drawn a lot of 
>> replies and come away more confused than before.

> I've been doing vast amounts of rural TIGER fixup over the past couple of
> years and this is what broadly seems to be what I've seen, bearing in mind
> standard practice in other developed countries and the idea that the
> highway= tag combines the importance in the highway network with some
> assurance of construction quality:

> * highway=motorway: interstate or other long-distance restricted-access road
> * highway=trunk: fast, busy State Highway or US Highway, often NHS/STRAHNET
> * highway=primary: major State Highway or US Highway
> * highway=secondary: other State Highway or major County Road
> * highway=tertiary: other through route, often a County Road, usually paved
> with centreline
> * highway=unclassified: rural minor route, sometimes a County Road, paved
> unless tagged otherwise
> * highway=residential: minor public road intended for residential access
> rather than through route, paved unless tagged otherwise
>   (N.B. currently not safe to assume paved in rural areas where
> tiger:reviewed=no)
> * highway=track: ungraded or rough, but usable by some four-wheeled vehicles

> There are many, many variations, especially because the US doesn't have a
> single nationwide system like most European countries, but if I had to sum
> it up in a few words I'd choose the above.

While most places in the US commonly use some variation of the above,
not all places use the same variation (and that wouldn't make sense
either). Using a common tagging scheme is probably much easier on a
state by state level, so we should have wiki pages describing how
suggested tagging in one specific state is different than the one
described on the US road tagging guide. We have those pages for some
states; problem is that many "drive-by-mappers" don't bother to look at
them but use their one (undocumented) criteria. One example would be a
mapper who changed all highways in Montana connecting to a port of entry
and onward to a Canadian highway to primary. Many of these are unpaved
"Montana Secondary State Highways" which I converted back to tertiary,
as described on the Montana/Highways wiki page.

Wolfgang

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

Re: [Talk-us] NJ mass road demotions?

[Richard Fairhurst]

Kevin Kenny wrote:
> Is there *anyone* that actually can speak to what *is* common 
> practice in the US? When I've asked, I've always drawn a lot of 
> replies and come away more confused than before.

I've been doing vast amounts of rural TIGER fixup over the past couple of
years and this is what broadly seems to be what I've seen, bearing in mind
standard practice in other developed countries and the idea that the
highway= tag combines the importance in the highway network with some
assurance of construction quality:

* highway=motorway: interstate or other long-distance restricted-access road
* highway=trunk: fast, busy State Highway or US Highway, often NHS/STRAHNET
* highway=primary: major State Highway or US Highway
* highway=secondary: other State Highway or major County Road
* highway=tertiary: other through route, often a County Road, usually paved
with centreline
* highway=unclassified: rural minor route, sometimes a County Road, paved
unless tagged otherwise
* highway=residential: minor public road intended for residential access
rather than through route, paved unless tagged otherwise
  (N.B. currently not safe to assume paved in rural areas where
tiger:reviewed=no)
* highway=track: ungraded or rough, but usable by some four-wheeled vehicles

There are many, many variations, especially because the US doesn't have a
single nationwide system like most European countries, but if I had to sum
it up in a few words I'd choose the above.

cheers
Richard



--
View this message in context: 
http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/NJ-mass-road-demotions-tp5894719p5897836.html
Sent from the USA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

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

Re: [Talk-us] NJ mass road demotions?

[Kevin Kenny]

On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 12:07 PM, Richard Fairhurst 
wrote:

> It would be really helpful if there were one single place where US common
> practice was explained, succinctly (not like the verbal diarrhoea[2] on the
> US Roads Tagging page) and unambiguously, and in a way that accords with
> international usage in OSM. As an auslander it's not my job to do it, but
> perhaps someone sensible on this list might like to?
>

Is there *anyone* that actually can speak to what *is* common practice
in the US? When I've asked, I've always drawn a lot of replies and come
away more confused than before.

Of course, a lot of what I map is in
a gray area where 'tertiary', 'residential', 'unclassified' and 'track'
tend to have blurred boundaries, and 4WD vehicles are strongly
recommended. The road where I'm parked in
https://www.flickr.com/photos/ke9tv/14041171575 is a signed and
numbered county highway, but I couldn't bring myself to tag it
'tertiary'.
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] NJ mass road demotions?

[Richard Fairhurst]

Albert Pundt wrote:
> This seems like a way overboard change.

I've just received a changeset message back from someone else who had made a
few unusual reclassifications, in this case highway=secondary for dirt roads
in Nebraska. The user explained that they had been working from this wiki
page:

  
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Highway_Functional_Classification_System

which is a pretty misleading page for a newcomer to stumble upon, and
doesn't accord with common practice. The page was created by one user in
2009 and has barely been touched since.[1]

There are other very verbose pages:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_States_roads_tagging
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Highway_tag_usage

and, of course, US information on international pages like
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Highway:International_equivalence .

It would be really helpful if there were one single place where US common
practice was explained, succinctly (not like the verbal diarrhoea[2] on the
US Roads Tagging page) and unambiguously, and in a way that accords with
international usage in OSM. As an auslander it's not my job to do it, but
perhaps someone sensible on this list might like to?

Richard

[1] I've now added big messy warnings at the top of the page
[2] it does actually include the phrase "according to the criteria
heretofore described", which is marvellous



--
View this message in context: 
http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/NJ-mass-road-demotions-tp5894719p5897823.html
Sent from the USA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

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

Re: [Talk-us] NJ mass road demotions?

[ajt1...@gmail.com]

On 11/06/2017 19:52, Peter Dobratz wrote:
I've found that even active OSM contributors don't necessarily check 
the email address associated with their OSM account.  If that is the 
case, they may have not yet seen any changeset comments you have made 
on their changesets.


Indeed - and if they continually ignore those then drop the DWG a mail 
on d...@osmfoundation.org so that we can send them a friendly "message 
that has to be read" before they continue editing.  However in this case 
they've only had 1 changeset discussion comment per month:


http://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=4337895

so they might have just forgotten the previous comment when seeing the 
next, and comments that directly invite a reply (i.e. "talk to us here" 
rather than "do X next time") might be more likely to get interaction.  
Also their last edit was a month ago so they probably haven't seen 
Bryan's detailed comment on 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/46561481 yet.


Best Regards,
Andy (from OSM's Data Working Group)



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

Re: [Talk-us] NJ mass road demotions?

[Peter Dobratz]

I've found that even active OSM contributors don't necessarily check the
email address associated with their OSM account.  If that is the case, they
may have not yet seen any changeset comments you have made on their
changesets.

It's good to follow up with an OSM private message as these pop-up when you
log in to www.openstreetmap.org or start an editor like JOSM.

Peter



On Sun, Jun 11, 2017 at 3:36 AM, Richard Fairhurst 
wrote:

> Bryan Housel wrote:
> > What’s an acceptable amount of time to wait for a response before I
> > just start reverting?
>
> I commented on another of granpueblo's changesets on 21st May and have also
> not had a response yet. Given that, you probably only need to wait just a
> couple of days before embarking on a revert.
>
> (More generally, we need to think about how we communicate "be bold in what
> you add, careful in what you change" to new mappers. We see this fairly
> often in the UK too - over-assertive changes from someone who, through no
> fault of their own, doesn't understand OSM conventions; and on occasion the
> response ends up putting the contributor off continuing with OSM.)
>
> Richard
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.
> com/NJ-mass-road-demotions-tp5894719p5897753.html
> Sent from the USA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
> ___
> 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] NJ mass road demotions?

[Richard Fairhurst]

Bryan Housel wrote:
> What’s an acceptable amount of time to wait for a response before I 
> just start reverting?

I commented on another of granpueblo's changesets on 21st May and have also
not had a response yet. Given that, you probably only need to wait just a
couple of days before embarking on a revert.

(More generally, we need to think about how we communicate "be bold in what
you add, careful in what you change" to new mappers. We see this fairly
often in the UK too - over-assertive changes from someone who, through no
fault of their own, doesn't understand OSM conventions; and on occasion the
response ends up putting the contributor off continuing with OSM.)

Richard



--
View this message in context: 
http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/NJ-mass-road-demotions-tp5894719p5897753.html
Sent from the USA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

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

Re: [Talk-us] NJ mass road demotions?

[Bryan Housel]

2 months later and they’re still at it.  I finally did reach out to the user 
with a changeset comment here:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/46561481#map=12/40.7194/-74.4255 


What’s an acceptable amount of time to wait for a response before I just start 
reverting?
Thanks, Bryan



> On Apr 4, 2017, at 11:39 AM, Albert Pundt  wrote:
> 
> The user is granpueblo  and 
> he's made a lot more than one changeset 
> ...
> 
> --Roadsguy
> 
> On Tue, Apr 4, 2017 at 11:00 AM, Albert Pundt  > wrote:
> Recently somebody went around and bulk-"demoted" many northern NJ roads. 
> Granted, some of these were marked as trunk and primary that would probably 
> be better as primary and secondary, respectively, but this person made 
> various trunk routes secondary (including major arterials such as US 206, NJ 
> 15, US 46, NJ 31, etc. that should be no lower than primary), primary routes 
> tertiary, and demoted most if not all secondary and tertiary routes to 
> residential/unclassified. This seems like a way overboard change. I started 
> to fix the more obvious errors here, but it seems like it would be way 
> quicker and easier to revert the changeset and start over with fewer and more 
> conservative reclassifications. What are your thoughts on this?
> 
> --Roadsguy
> 
> ___
> 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] NJ mass road demotions?

[Albert Pundt]

The user is granpueblo  and
he's made a lot more than one changeset
...

--Roadsguy

On Tue, Apr 4, 2017 at 11:00 AM, Albert Pundt  wrote:

> Recently somebody went around and bulk-"demoted" many northern NJ roads.
> Granted, some of these were marked as trunk and primary that would probably
> be better as primary and secondary, respectively, but this person made
> various trunk routes secondary (including major arterials such as US 206,
> NJ 15, US 46, NJ 31, etc. that should be no lower than primary), primary
> routes tertiary, and demoted most if not all secondary and tertiary routes
> to residential/unclassified. This seems like a way overboard change. I
> started to fix the more obvious errors here, but it seems like it would be
> way quicker and easier to revert the changeset and start over with fewer
> and more conservative reclassifications. What are your thoughts on this?
>
> --Roadsguy
>
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] NJ mass road demotions?

[Bryan Housel]

I agree that seems wrong.. If you’ve got a list of changesets, or the username 
who is doing it, I can help with the revert.
Thanks, Bryan



> On Apr 4, 2017, at 11:00 AM, Albert Pundt  wrote:
> 
> Recently somebody went around and bulk-"demoted" many northern NJ roads. 
> Granted, some of these were marked as trunk and primary that would probably 
> be better as primary and secondary, respectively, but this person made 
> various trunk routes secondary (including major arterials such as US 206, NJ 
> 15, US 46, NJ 31, etc. that should be no lower than primary), primary routes 
> tertiary, and demoted most if not all secondary and tertiary routes to 
> residential/unclassified. This seems like a way overboard change. I started 
> to fix the more obvious errors here, but it seems like it would be way 
> quicker and easier to revert the changeset and start over with fewer and more 
> conservative reclassifications. What are your thoughts on this?
> 
> --Roadsguy
> ___
> 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] NJ mass road demotions?

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On 04/04/2017 10:00 AM, Albert Pundt wrote:
> Recently somebody went around and bulk-"demoted" many northern NJ roads.
> Granted, some of these were marked as trunk and primary that would
> probably be better as primary and secondary, respectively, but this
> person made various trunk routes secondary (including major arterials
> such as US 206, NJ 15, US 46, NJ 31, etc. that should be no lower than
> primary), primary routes tertiary, and demoted most if not all secondary
> and tertiary routes to residential/unclassified. This seems like a way
> overboard change. I started to fix the more obvious errors here, but it
> seems like it would be way quicker and easier to revert the changeset
> and start over with fewer and more conservative reclassifications. What
> are your thoughts on this?

I'd lean towards reverting the entire changeset before it wipes out too
much additional work to do so. Also leave the user who did this a polite
but direct comment on the changeset that This Is Not Cool.

-- 
Shawn K. Quinn 
http://www.rantroulette.com
http://www.skqrecordquest.com

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