Martijn van Oosterhout schrieb:
On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 10:43 AM, Steve Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 10 Jul 2008, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
Inside housing estates sounds like
living_street me. Maybe the word 'estate' means something else in the
UK than I think.
The definition of
On Sat, 12 Jul 2008, Gervase Markham wrote:
Well, there was a note on Map Features saying not to do it, but until
recently it didn't say what you _should_ do.
Until recently there was no approved tag to do it. A lot of people
promoted the idea of just never adding roads without knowing their
On Fri, 11 Jul 2008, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
And that's fine: you seem to place more of an emphasis on the Gospel
According To Map Features than I do
If you don't go by the definitions in Map Features, what definitions do
you go by? As far as you are concerned, what is the difference
My two cents, or Kurush here in Northern Cyprus.
The road tag is a good thing, as it lets one and all know that further work
needs to be done surveying etc.
The question for me is; what counts as an unclassified road?
Here, *most* roads are 1.5 cars wide, no markings whatsoever.
But, the vast
Steve Hill wrote:
If you don't go by the definitions in Map Features, what definitions do
you go by? As far as you are concerned, what is the difference between an
unclassified and a tertiary? If we don't have some agreed definition, the
tags become meaningless since the meaning will vary
Steve Hill:
On Sat, 12 Jul 2008, Gervase Markham wrote:
Well, there was a note on Map Features saying not to do it, but until
recently it didn't say what you _should_ do.
Until recently there was no approved tag to do it. A lot of people
promoted the idea of just never adding roads
Richard Fairhurst wrote:
Have they really? I don't recall ever seeing this, and I do quite a
lot of rural mapping.
Well, there was a note on Map Features saying not to do it, but until
recently it didn't say what you _should_ do.
Gerv
___
talk
On Thu, 10 Jul 2008, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
I don't want to be annoying, but what about the ordinary roads, which
don't fit in the above classification. With houses on both side but
limited to 50km/h for example.
Well, this is why I don't like the highway=residential tag.
Inside
On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 10:43 AM, Steve Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 10 Jul 2008, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
I don't want to be annoying, but what about the ordinary roads, which
don't fit in the above classification. With houses on both side but
limited to 50km/h for example.
On 11/07/2008 09:43, Steve Hill wrote:
The definition of living_street is a bit vague in the wiki. A relevant
bit seems to be:
Simply tagging them with something like highway=residential, max_speed=7,
motorcar=yes, motorcycle=yes, bicycle=yes
Which implies to me that the living_street
On 11/07/2008 09:43, Steve Hill wrote:
On Thu, 10 Jul 2008, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
I don't want to be annoying, but what about the ordinary roads, which
don't fit in the above classification. With houses on both side but
limited to 50km/h for example.
Well, this is why I don't like
On Fri, 11 Jul 2008, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
But from the your description here, what do you tag
roads that are 30mph and don't have a centre line? i.e. the single
most common type here.
That's a bit of a judgement call depending on the situation I think. Most
of the streets on
On Fri, 11 Jul 2008, David Earl wrote:
The equivalent here, to which the tag would be applied, is known as
Home Zone, and it has a specific sign:
http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/roads/tss/general/coll_newroadsignsandmarkingsleaf/dft_roads_022863-16.jpg
(which is taken from this page
On Fri, 11 Jul 2008, David Earl wrote:
I don't see the problem in that example:
highway=residential
maxspeed=50
Yes, in that case. Although I think tagging roads lined with houses as
highway=tertiary, abutters=residential is better - really the only
difference between a tertiary road and
On 11/07/2008 10:26, Steve Hill wrote:
On Fri, 11 Jul 2008, David Earl wrote:
The equivalent here, to which the tag would be applied, is known as
Home Zone, and it has a specific sign:
http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/roads/tss/general/coll_newroadsignsandmarkingsleaf/dft_roads_022863-16.jpg
On Fri, 11 Jul 2008, David Earl wrote:
At least the rules governing 20mph areas (not specifically Home Zones) have
been relaxed a bit to make them easier to implement (though Cambridgeshire is
till very reluctant, places like Hull and Portsmouth have been really
progressive on this).
To
On Thu, 10 Jul 2008, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
Er, I've driven past that one a handful of times (some friends used to
live in Pontardawe) and if it's the road I'm thinking of - down
towards the KFC - it _is_ unclassified. Well, either that or tertiary;
It can't possibly be unclassified - an
] [mailto:talk-
[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Steve Hill
Sent: 11 July 2008 2:57 PM
To: Richard Fairhurst
Cc: talk@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Misclassified roads
On Thu, 10 Jul 2008, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
Er, I've driven past that one a handful of times (some friends used
Steve Hill wrote:
On Thu, 10 Jul 2008, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
Er, I've driven past that one a handful of times (some friends
used to
live in Pontardawe) and if it's the road I'm thinking of - down
towards the KFC - it _is_ unclassified. Well, either that or
tertiary;
It can't
Alex Wilson wrote:
Perhaps a compromise would be to add a new tag: something like
'needs_review=true'. After a revisit of the road, the tag can be
removed and the road classification left as is or modified as appropriate.
Cheers,
Alex
Wouldn't it be better to have a last_reviewed field
there,
but correct them, don't delete info on the offchance.
Regards,
David
Message: 2
Date: Wed, 9 Jul 2008 15:36:03 +0100 (BST)
From: Steve Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [OSM-talk] Misclassified roads
To: talk@openstreetmap.org
Message-ID:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN
info on the offchance.
Regards,
David
Message: 2
Date: Wed, 9 Jul 2008 15:36:03 +0100 (BST)
From: Steve Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [OSM-talk] Misclassified roads
To: talk@openstreetmap.org
Message-ID:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; format=flowed; charset
From: Steve Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 9 July 2008 15:36:03 BDT
To: talk@openstreetmap.org
Subject: [OSM-talk] Misclassified roads
Following the approval of the highway=road tag, I've set about
aggressively changing a lot of the highway=unclassified roads
around Swansea, that I believe
On Wed, 9 Jul 2008, David Earl wrote:
We've gone round and round the issue of what road classification means many
times before. With a few dissenters, the consensus has generally been that
you tag what you find on the ground. This sometimes contradicts the
official classification. Some
Steve Hill wrote:
You misunderstand the problem - the problem isn't that the classification
on OSM doesn't match the official classification. The problem is that
until highway=road was approved, there was no classification for it's a
road but I can't remember what type, so people have used
On Thu, 10 Jul 2008, elvin ibbotson wrote:
If you believe they are wrongly tagged (I would avoid the word misclassified
when referring to an unclassified road ;-) presumably you have a good idea
what classification they are, so why not just re-tag them as primary, tertiary
or whatever?
I know
Steve Hill wrote:
Sent: 10 July 2008 10:20 AM
To: elvin ibbotson
Cc: talk@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Misclassified roads
I know that they are not unclassified, but couldn't tell you what they
really are without actually going and surveying them. So my plan was to
retag them
On Thu, 10 Jul 2008, Andy Robinson (blackadder-lists) wrote:
But any automatic retagging would change those roads which are truly
unclassified (and maybe have been surveyed by others) to highway=road.
Yes, and they would have to be resurveyed because at the moment it is
impossible to tell
Steve Hill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sent: 10 July 2008 11:46 AM
To: Andy Robinson (blackadder-lists)
Cc: talk@openstreetmap.org
Subject: RE: [OSM-talk] Misclassified roads
On Thu, 10 Jul 2008, Andy Robinson (blackadder-lists) wrote:
But any automatic retagging would change those roads
On Thu, 10 Jul 2008, Andy Robinson (blackadder-lists) wrote:
You keep saying that but you haven't given a good example. Can you?
A dual carriageway that was tagged as highway=unclassified:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=51.67075lon=-3.91377zoom=16layers=B00FTF
A bunch of residential roads
On Thu, 10 Jul 2008, Andy Robinson (blackadder-lists) wrote:
If you know they are truly residential roads, then why not retag them as
such?
Because they are part of a large number of roads that I know are not
unclassified, but were tagged as such. So I have retagged them to
highlight the
.
Regards,
David
Message: 2
Date: Wed, 9 Jul 2008 15:36:03 +0100 (BST)
From: Steve Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [OSM-talk] Misclassified roads
To: talk@openstreetmap.org mailto:talk@openstreetmap.org
Message-ID
On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 11:20 AM, Steve Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Unclassified:
Narrower than a tertiary, usually without a dotted line along the middle
and usually with a relatively high speed limit (although you might not want
to drive anywhere near that speed :)
Residential:
Roads
Following the approval of the highway=road tag, I've set about
aggressively changing a lot of the highway=unclassified roads around
Swansea, that I believe are misclassified, to highway=road, with the
intention that they can then be surveyed and reclassified correctly.
However, after starting
Steve Hill wrote:
Following the approval of the highway=road tag, I've set about
aggressively changing a lot of the highway=unclassified roads around
Swansea, that I believe are misclassified, to highway=road, with the
intention that they can then be surveyed and reclassified correctly.
Steve Hill wrote:
However, after starting to do this, I've realised just how many of the
roads are misclassified - I'd estimate that well over 80% of the roads
tagged as highway=unclassified are, infact, not unclassified roads.
That 80% figure surprises me, a lot.
Most roads _should_ be
On Wed, 9 Jul 2008, Chris Hill wrote:
I would be strongly against a global change of highway=unclassified - all of
the roads I have tagged as unclassified deserve to be so. I have been
working partly on a very rural area, where many of the roads are unclassified
(country lanes). To have
At 05:03 PM 9/07/2008, Steve Hill wrote:
On Wed, 9 Jul 2008, Chris Hill wrote:
I would be strongly against a global change of highway=unclassified - all of
the roads I have tagged as unclassified deserve to be so. I have been
working partly on a very rural area, where many of the roads are
On 09/07/2008 16:03, Steve Hill wrote:
On Wed, 9 Jul 2008, Chris Hill wrote:
I would be strongly against a global change of highway=unclassified - all of
the roads I have tagged as unclassified deserve to be so. I have been
working partly on a very rural area, where many of the roads are
39 matches
Mail list logo
