Kai Krueger wrote:
If I am not mistaken, you your self have said that you would rather
use Ordinance Survey data then OpenStreetMap data, despite being
an absolute OSM enthusiast. And if I remember correctly, this was
not only due to licensing, but also because of ease of use?
Indeed, but
From: Richard Fairhurst [mailto:rich...@systemed.net]
Sent: 14 April 2011 12:27
To: talk-gb OSM List (E-mail)
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Maxspeed tagging for the UK
Ed Loach wrote:
Admittedly I have no motorways in the area I map, but I have added
lots of maxspeed tags recently to try
From: Kai Krueger [mailto:kakrue...@gmail.com]
Sent: 15 April 2011 02:17
To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Maxspeed tagging for the UK
Richard Fairhurst wrote:
Why are we doing this?
In OSM we optimise for the mapper, not the data consumer. That means we
tag
Steve Doerr wrote:
Yes, there's no such word as 'trailor'!
That is embarrassing! Unfortunately, I then copied and pasted the mistake
into several other columns, too. Fixed.
Cheers
David
--
View this message in context:
On 15 April 2011 02:36, Kai Krueger kakrue...@gmail.com wrote:
Steve Doerr-2 wrote:
On 09/04/2011 08:15, Peter Miller wrote:
maxspeed:type=GB:dual_carriageway (or GB:motorway, GB:rural, GB:urban)
according to taginfo.openstreetmap.de there are 72 000 source:maxspeed and
only 552
On 12 April 2011 15:39, Steve Doerr doerr.step...@gmail.com wrote:
On 12/04/2011 15:16, Ed Avis wrote:
Peter Millerpeter.miller@... writes:
Are people happy with:
GB:motorway (which implies 70 mph at present and possibly 80 mph in the
future)
GB:dual_carriageway (which implies 70 mph
On 14/04/2011 08:21, Peter Miller wrote:
On 12 April 2011 15:39, Steve Doerr doerr.step...@gmail.com
mailto:doerr.step...@gmail.com wrote:
On 12/04/2011 15:16, Ed Avis wrote:
However, one flaw is that the speed limit sign is not for
'dual carriageway
limit
Peter Miller wrote:
So the proposal is now:
maxspeed:type=GB:national_single|GB:national_dual|GB:motorway|GB:restricted
I may be missing the point on all of this, but:
Why are we doing this?
In OSM we optimise for the mapper, not the data consumer. That means we tag
exceptions, not
Sorry I'm late to the party, but I'd like to emphasise the point that
others have made that the NationalSpeedLimitApplies sign should not be
tagged the same as a 60mph sign. Apart from the fact that it means
different things for different types of vehicle, it may not even mean
60mph for cars.
On 14/04/2011 11:06, Peter Miller wrote:
On 14 April 2011 09:59, Steve Doerr doerr.step...@gmail.com
mailto:doerr.step...@gmail.com wrote:
On 14/04/2011 08:21, Peter Miller wrote:
On 12 April 2011 15:39, Steve Doerr doerr.step...@gmail.com
mailto:doerr.step...@gmail.com
In OSM we optimise for the mapper, not the data consumer. That
means we tag exceptions, not majorities.
Admittedly I have no motorways in the area I map, but I have added
lots of maxspeed tags recently to try and eliminate (or reduce the
number of) mapdust/skobbler missing speed limit bugs. I
Peter Miller wrote:
There is also the difficulty of identifying which country you are in
Nominatim seems to manage. :)
There is current the problem that no one has actually created a look-
up table for the values that can be used by downstream systems
Ah, now, this is where we have
Ed Loach wrote:
Admittedly I have no motorways in the area I map, but I have added
lots of maxspeed tags recently to try and eliminate (or reduce the
number of) mapdust/skobbler missing speed limit bugs.
Gah!
Doing that on national speed limit roads is surely tagging for the
renderer writ
On 14/04/11 11:42, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
Peter Miller wrote:
So the proposal is now:
maxspeed:type=GB:national_single|GB:national_dual|GB:motorway|GB:restricted
I may be missing the point on all of this, but:
Why are we doing this?
In OSM we optimise for the mapper, not the data
On 14 April 2011 12:27, Chris Hill o...@raggedred.net wrote:
On 14/04/11 11:42, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
Peter Miller wrote:
So the proposal is now:
maxspeed:type=GB:national_single|GB:national_dual|GB:motorway|GB:restricted
I may be missing the point on all of this, but:
Why are we
Peter Miller wrote:
Assuming we are supporting these second format then where should the
look-up
table be that gives the values? This page is having a go at it but doesn't
seem to be doing a very good job!
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_tags_for_routing/Maxspeed
What about updating
On 14/04/2011 18:30, davespod wrote:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Davespod/Speed-Limits
This needs a bit more work, as some of the column headings could probably be
better (and there might even be some mistakes in the speed limits, as I was
in a rush!)
Yes, there's no such word as
Richard Fairhurst wrote:
Peter Miller wrote:
There is also the difficulty of identifying which country you are in
Nominatim seems to manage. :)
I am sure you have seen the resources that nominatim requires to do this
identifying. If I am not mistaken it takes nominatim several weeks
Richard Fairhurst wrote:
Why are we doing this?
In OSM we optimise for the mapper, not the data consumer. That means we
tag exceptions, not majorities.
+1 / -1 (Yes and no)
It has to be a compromise with which both sides can live with, mappers and
application developers.
If a tagging
Steve Doerr-2 wrote:
On 09/04/2011 08:15, Peter Miller wrote:
maxspeed:type=GB:dual_carriageway (or GB:motorway, GB:rural, GB:urban)
according to taginfo.openstreetmap.de there are 72 000 source:maxspeed and
only 552 maxspeed:type. So at least according to the data source:maxspeed is
On 11 April 2011 23:39, SomeoneElse li...@mail.atownsend.org.uk wrote:
On 9 April 2011 08:15, Peter Miller peter.mil...@itoworld.com mailto:
peter.mil...@itoworld.com wrote:
...
We seem to be nudging towards something close to a conclusion.
Can I suggest that the following two
On 12/04/2011 09:38, Peter Miller wrote:
On 11 April 2011 23:39, SomeoneElse li...@mail.atownsend.org.uk
mailto:li...@mail.atownsend.org.uk wrote:
We've lost the information that the sign is actually NOT a 60 mph
sign. Something like method 2 above would have avoided losing
On 11/04/2011 23:39, SomeoneElse wrote:
Great - someone has now changed a bunch of maxspeed=national locally
to me to to maxspeed=60 mph. Next I guess someone will come along
and add
source:maxspeed=i_was_sat_in_my_armchair_and_it_seemed_like_a_good_idea
or similar?
We've lost the
On 12 April 2011 11:04, Ed Avis e...@waniasset.com wrote:
SomeoneElse lists@... writes:
I can still map maxspeed=what_the_sign_says as I have been doing.
Maybe it would be best to tag that as maxspeed_sign=what_the_sign_says.
Probably maxspeed:sign would be better than maxspeed_sign.
I do
I apologise for editing too soon and having taken silence as agreement. I
will not any more editing of maxspeed while we resolve this issue.
In my defense I would note again that a considerable percentage of
unrestricted roads in the UK had already been tagged in numeric format and
that my manual
On 12/04/11 09:38, Peter Miller wrote:
The general conclusion of the discussion above was that where
maxspeed=60mph is applied to a single carriageway road there is also a
default 'maxspeed:type=GB:unrestricted' (or whatever value is decided
on). This default (and the one for 70mph for
On 12 April 2011 12:30, Chris Hill o...@raggedred.net wrote:
On 12/04/11 09:38, Peter Miller wrote:
The general conclusion of the discussion above was that where
maxspeed=60mph is applied to a single carriageway road there is also a
default 'maxspeed:type=GB:unrestricted' (or whatever value
Peter Miller peter.miller@... writes:
Are people happy with:
GB:motorway (which implies 70 mph at present and possibly 80 mph in the future)
GB:dual_carriageway (which implies 70 mph at present)
GB:single_carriageway (which implies 60 mph at present)
I think this is a sensible scheme and can go
On 12/04/2011 15:16, Ed Avis wrote:
Peter Millerpeter.miller@... writes:
Are people happy with:
GB:motorway (which implies 70 mph at present and possibly 80 mph in the future)
GB:dual_carriageway (which implies 70 mph at present)
GB:single_carriageway (which implies 60 mph at present)
I
On 10 April 2011 22:14, Brian Prangle bpran...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi everyone
How do variable speed limits which are signalled via overhead gantries on
motorways during congestion fit into your schema? I've just tagged sections
of the M42 and M6 in the West Mids with maxspeed=variable and
On 9 April 2011 08:15, Peter Miller peter.mil...@itoworld.com
mailto:peter.mil...@itoworld.com
mailto:peter.mil...@itoworld.com
mailto:peter.mil...@itoworld.com wrote:
...
We seem to be nudging towards something close to a conclusion.
Hi everyone
How do variable speed limits which are signalled via overhead gantries on
motorways during congestion fit into your schema? I've just tagged sections
of the M42 and M6 in the West Mids with maxspeed=variable and wouldn't want
to see my work obliterated by some new ( and for these
On 6 April 2011 16:53, Ed Loach e...@loach.me.uk wrote:
Richard wrote:
I'd put the number for cars (ie 70mph for a dual carriageway), and
the source if it's not the number that's on the sign.
This is similar to what I've done. For areas where a national speed
limit applies I have used
On 9 April 2011 08:15, Peter Miller peter.mil...@itoworld.com wrote:
On 6 April 2011 16:53, Ed Loach e...@loach.me.uk wrote:
Richard wrote:
I'd put the number for cars (ie 70mph for a dual carriageway), and
the source if it's not the number that's on the sign.
This is similar to what
On 09/04/2011 08:15, Peter Miller wrote:
maxspeed:type=GB:dual_carriageway (or GB:motorway, GB:rural, GB:urban)
I don't like the urban/rural dichotomy for the UK as it doesn't
correspond to anything in the legislation here - unless you believe that
street-lighting is a specifically urban
On 9 April 2011 08:49, Steve Doerr doerr.step...@gmail.com wrote:
On 09/04/2011 08:15, Peter Miller wrote:
maxspeed:type=GB:dual_carriageway (or GB:motorway, GB:rural, GB:urban)
I don't like the urban/rural dichotomy for the UK as it doesn't correspond
to anything in the legislation here
On 09/04/11 08:20, Peter Miller wrote:
On 9 April 2011 08:15, Peter Miller peter.mil...@itoworld.com
mailto:peter.mil...@itoworld.com wrote:
On 6 April 2011 16:53, Ed Loach e...@loach.me.uk
mailto:e...@loach.me.uk wrote:
Richard wrote:
I'd put the number for
On 9 April 2011 11:46, Chris Hill o...@raggedred.net wrote:
On 09/04/11 08:20, Peter Miller wrote:
On 9 April 2011 08:15, Peter Miller peter.mil...@itoworld.com mailto:
peter.mil...@itoworld.com wrote:
On 6 April 2011 16:53, Ed Loach e...@loach.me.uk
mailto:e...@loach.me.uk
Do we have a preference for tagging unrestricted limits in the UK? I say
that because a section of the A1 is beginning to look a bit war damaged (as
in edit war).
It started with maxspeed=national. I changed it to maxspeed=70 mph. Christcf
then added a 'source:maxspeed = UK:nsl_dual' and also
On 06/04/11 14:22, Peter Miller wrote:
Do we have a preference for tagging unrestricted limits in the UK? I
say that because a section of the A1 is beginning to look a bit war
damaged (as in edit war).
It started with maxspeed=national. I changed it to maxspeed=70 mph.
Christcf then added
On 6 April 2011 15:02, Chris Hill o...@raggedred.net wrote:
On 06/04/11 14:22, Peter Miller wrote:
Do we have a preference for tagging unrestricted limits in the UK? I say
that because a section of the A1 is beginning to look a bit war damaged (as
in edit war).
It started with
Chris Hill osm@... writes:
I'd use maxspeed:national . All of the roads being discussed are in the
UK, so they do not need UK: or GB: namespaces.
True enough in principle but it can be difficult for client applications to work
out that fact. I expect they would prefer to just get the tags for
I'd put the number for cars (ie 70mph for a dual carriageway), and the
source if it's not the number that's on the sign.
So maxspeed=30mph+source:maxspeed=national means: there's some street
lights and no signs. If there's some street lights and no signs
comes to mean something else, then a bot
On 6 April 2011 16:19, Richard Mann richard.mann.westoxf...@gmail.comwrote:
I'd put the number for cars (ie 70mph for a dual carriageway), and the
source if it's not the number that's on the sign.
So maxspeed=30mph+source:maxspeed=national means: there's some street
lights and no signs. If
Richard Mann richard.mann.westoxford@... writes:
So maxspeed=30mph+source:maxspeed=national means: there's some street
lights and no signs. If there's some street lights and no signs
comes to mean something else, then a bot can change the
maxspeed=30mph (adding a note that it's done so).
In
On 06/04/11 15:55, Peter Miller wrote:
On 6 April 2011 15:02, Chris Hill o...@raggedred.net
wrote:
On 06/04/11 14:22, Peter Miller wrote:
Do we have a preference for tagging
On 06/04/2011 16:26, Peter Miller wrote:
On 6 April 2011 16:19, Richard Mann richard.mann.westoxf...@gmail.com
mailto:richard.mann.westoxf...@gmail.com wrote:
I'd put the number for cars (ie 70mph for a dual carriageway), and the
source if it's not the number that's on the sign.
Richard wrote:
I'd put the number for cars (ie 70mph for a dual carriageway), and
the source if it's not the number that's on the sign.
This is similar to what I've done. For areas where a national speed
limit applies I have used
maxspeed= (maximum speed for cars, which is the maximum
On 06/04/2011 15:02, Chris Hill wrote:
On 06/04/11 14:22, Peter Miller wrote:
Do we have a preference for tagging unrestricted limits in the UK? I
say that because a section of the A1 is beginning to look a bit war
damaged (as in edit war).
...
Any thoughts?
I think we should tag
49 matches
Mail list logo
