On 6/2/2011 3:17 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
To this end, I've been systematically going through trunks in
the US and adding lanes=* tags. This is of course useful even if nothing
is done rendering-wise.
Thanks to PeterIto, we can see the fruits of this:
On 5/29/2011 3:32 AM, Nathan Mills wrote:
On Sun, 29 May 2011 03:00:03 -0400, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
Perhaps the best way to handle it would be to render a wider line if
oneway=yes and not lanes=1 or if oneway=no/unset and lanes=4 or more.
Thus divided highways would not need a lane count to
On Mon, May 30, 2011 at 10:41 PM, Toby Murray toby.mur...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 4:05 PM, Nathan Mills nat...@nwacg.net wrote:
On Sun, 29 May 2011 12:09:30 -0700, Paul Johnson wrote:
I'm thinking the differences between motorways and trunks are minor.
Trunks may have
Kristian Zoerhoff kristian.zoerh...@gmail.com writes:
On Mon, May 30, 2011 at 10:41 PM, Toby Murray toby.mur...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 4:05 PM, Nathan Mills nat...@nwacg.net wrote:
On Sun, 29 May 2011 12:09:30 -0700, Paul Johnson wrote:
I'm thinking the differences between
I hate it when I forget to hit Reply-All
On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 8:54 AM, Greg Troxel g...@ir.bbn.com wrote:
Kristian Zoerhoff kristian.zoerh...@gmail.com writes:
On Mon, May 30, 2011 at 10:41 PM, Toby Murray toby.mur...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 4:05 PM, Nathan Mills
I have only skimmed these messages, so forgive me if it was already brought
up.
There are two criteria I do not think were brought up. Length of a road, ie
is it important for the city, county, state, or country. This needs to be
balanced with the width, and other features of the road like
On 05/31/2011 06:26 AM, Kristian Zoerhoff wrote:
On Mon, May 30, 2011 at 10:41 PM, Toby Murray
toby.murray-re5jqeeqqe8avxtiumw...@public.gmane.org wrote:
On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 4:05 PM, Nathan Mills
nathan-jiavzwzna1neowh0uzb...@public.gmane.org wrote:
On Sun, 29 May 2011 12:09:30 -0700,
On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 6:21 PM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote:
On 05/31/2011 06:26 AM, Kristian Zoerhoff wrote:
On Mon, May 30, 2011 at 10:41 PM, Toby Murray
toby.murray-re5jqeeqqe8avxtiumw...@public.gmane.org wrote:
On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 4:05 PM, Nathan Mills
On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 4:05 PM, Nathan Mills nat...@nwacg.net wrote:
On Sun, 29 May 2011 12:09:30 -0700, Paul Johnson wrote:
I'm thinking the differences between motorways and trunks are minor.
Trunks may have intersections, motorways don't.
That's the simple way to state my opinion. It
On 5/29/2011 1:50 AM, Nathan Mills wrote:
On Sun, 29 May 2011 01:00:25 -0400, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
On 5/29/2011 12:37 AM, Nathan Mills wrote:
US-441 between St. Cloud and Yeehaw Junction could easily be trunk by
NE2's definition
Nope, since any through traffic will be on the Turnpike. US
On Sun, 29 May 2011 02:18:09 -0400, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
On 5/29/2011 1:50 AM, Nathan Mills wrote:
It's actually faster to take 441 to Yeehaw and get on the turnpike
there
when traveling from eastern and southeastern Orlando to points south
of
Port St. Lucie.
Even with the four-laning
On 5/29/2011 2:30 AM, Nathan Mills wrote:
I think that trunk is more useful if it's prescriptive, more along the
lines of a motorway than primary and below. If we aren't going to do
that, we need to come up with another value for highway and get it
rendered by default. It's something that map
On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 12:32 AM, Nathan Mills nat...@nwacg.net wrote:
Would I be correct in stating that tagging an undivided 2 lane (one lane in
each direction) highways would be improper, even if a state calls the
highway a trunk for planning purposes?
No, you wouldn't. Trunk is the proper
On Sun, 29 May 2011 03:00:03 -0400, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
Perhaps the best way to handle it would be to render a wider line if
oneway=yes and not lanes=1 or if oneway=no/unset and lanes=4 or more.
Thus divided highways would not need a lane count to be wider, but
undivided roads would need to
Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com wrote:
There are many types of roads that it's not possible to describe. How
do
you tag an unpaved classified road so the map shows that it's unpaved
(this is very common in the third world, but also occurs in extremely
rural areas of the US)? You don't.
i'm deliberately not quoting or responding here in order
to break out of the current, somewhat circular discussion.
the trunk classification does two things:
1) it influences rendering engines
2) it influences routing
we all are familiar with what impact 1 has, but i think a lot of folks are
On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 10:34 AM, Richard Welty rwe...@averillpark.net wrote:
in short: a routing engine will probably use classifications where maxspeed
data is missing, but probably only to derive guesstimates of maxspeed
values.
Now that I think about it, that's actually an excellent reason
On 5/29/11 11:37 AM, Anthony wrote:
On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 10:34 AM, Richard Weltyrwe...@averillpark.net wrote:
in short: a routing engine will probably use classifications where maxspeed
data is missing, but probably only to derive guesstimates of maxspeed
values.
Now that I think about it,
On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 11:44 AM, Richard Welty rwe...@averillpark.net wrote:
On 5/29/11 11:37 AM, Anthony wrote:
On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 10:34 AM, Richard Weltyrwe...@averillpark.net
wrote:
in short: a routing engine will probably use classifications where
maxspeed
data is missing, but
On 5/29/11 11:59 AM, Anthony wrote:
On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 11:44 AM, Richard Weltyrwe...@averillpark.net wrote:
On 5/29/11 11:37 AM, Anthony wrote:
On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 10:34 AM, Richard Weltyrwe...@averillpark.net
wrote:
in short: a routing engine will probably use classifications
On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 12:36 PM, Richard Welty rwe...@averillpark.net wrote:
On 5/29/11 11:59 AM, Anthony wrote:
Anyway, why argue about it? If you have a reason to start
aggressively collecting data the missing maxspeed data, just do it.
argue in the sense of a civil discussion of two
On 05/28/2011 12:19 PM, Anthony wrote:
On Sat, May 28, 2011 at 10:40 AM, Mike N
niceman-fodfmywu...@public.gmane.org wrote:
On 5/28/2011 9:12 AM, Anthony wrote:
Trunk has no meaning beyond color the road the same color as other
things that are tagged trunk.
Even color is not defined -
On 05/28/2011 06:13 PM, Nathan Mills wrote:
On Sat, 28 May 2011 20:54:07 -0400, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
You described your criteria, but did not explain how trunk is more
appropriate than primary for a two lane rural highway between two
small-to-tiny cities. If you use trunk for that, there
On 05/29/2011 08:37 AM, Anthony wrote:
On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 10:34 AM, Richard Welty
rwelty-Fu78d/dmhrmzesifbgk...@public.gmane.org wrote:
in short: a routing engine will probably use classifications where maxspeed
data is missing, but probably only to derive guesstimates of maxspeed
Hi,
Paul Johnson wrote:
So how would that bring us closer to having global consistency, since
the scope of OSM is worldwide?
It is a common misconception that OSM should have globally consistent
tagging standards since OSM is a world-wide project.
If someone were to really demand that, the
On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 3:17 PM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote:
On 05/29/2011 08:37 AM, Anthony wrote:
On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 10:34 AM, Richard Welty
rwelty-Fu78d/dmhrmzesifbgk...@public.gmane.org wrote:
Now that I think about it, that's actually an excellent reason why
On 05/29/2011 12:56 PM, Anthony wrote:
On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 3:17 PM, Paul Johnson
baloo-PVOPTusIyP/sroww+9z...@public.gmane.org wrote:
On 05/29/2011 08:37 AM, Anthony wrote:
On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 10:34 AM, Richard Welty
rwelty-Fu78d/dmhrmzesifbgk...@public.gmane.org wrote:
Now that I
On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 4:03 PM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote:
On 05/29/2011 12:56 PM, Anthony wrote:
What do you mean by global consistency and why is it desired?
Having some kind of uniformity on a large scale means you wouldn't have
to learn how to read the map again just because
On Sun, 29 May 2011 12:09:30 -0700, Paul Johnson wrote:
I'm thinking the differences between motorways and trunks are minor.
Trunks may have intersections, motorways don't.
That's the simple way to state my opinion. It also seemed to be the
thrust of most of the discussion on the talk page
On 05/29/2011 02:00 PM, Anthony wrote:
On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 4:03 PM, Paul Johnson
baloo-PVOPTusIyP/sroww+9z...@public.gmane.org wrote:
On 05/29/2011 12:56 PM, Anthony wrote:
What do you mean by global consistency and why is it desired?
Having some kind of uniformity on a large scale
On 5/29/2011 5:16 PM, Paul Johnson wrote:
subtle mass vandalism
This is why I ignore Paul.
Though I really wonder about this edit:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/14751094/history
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
On Sun, 29 May 2011 20:00:33 -0400, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
On 5/29/2011 5:16 PM, Paul Johnson wrote:
subtle mass vandalism
This is why I ignore Paul.
Though I really wonder about this edit:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/14751094/history
Using your standard, there's nothing to
On 5/29/2011 8:09 PM, Nathan Mills wrote:
FSM knows the aerial imagery around here is outdated, to put it mildly.
Try the NAIP imagery:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/National_Agriculture_Imagery_Program
___
Talk-us mailing list
On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 10:04 AM, Nathan Mills nat...@nwacg.net wrote:
On Fri, 27 May 2011 09:26:41 -0400, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
No, trunk is also used for a major intercity highway that's not a
freeway. Take a look at the UK and their network of trunks.
I'm sorry, I thought I posted to
On 5/28/2011 9:12 AM, Anthony wrote:
Trunk has no meaning beyond color the road the same color as other
things that are tagged trunk.
Even color is not defined - some trunks can be toll / not toll.
However, trunk *could* serve as a router hint that the road is a
better selection than
On 5/28/11 10:40 AM, Mike N wrote:
On 5/28/2011 9:12 AM, Anthony wrote:
Trunk has no meaning beyond color the road the same color as other
things that are tagged trunk.
Even color is not defined - some trunks can be toll / not toll.
However, trunk *could* serve as a router hint that the
On Sat, 28 May 2011 01:36:00 -0400, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
I mean best route, period. There's no diagonal Interstate there.
US-71 to I-44 to I-40 is faster. Not really a route I'd enjoy, but
still faster.
___
Talk-us mailing list
On Sat, May 28, 2011 at 10:40 AM, Mike N nice...@att.net wrote:
On 5/28/2011 9:12 AM, Anthony wrote:
Trunk has no meaning beyond color the road the same color as other
things that are tagged trunk.
Even color is not defined - some trunks can be toll / not toll.
However, trunk *could*
On Sat, 28 May 2011 15:19:03 -0400, Anthony wrote:
In my experience the difference between primary and trunk is
generally
very minor, to the point where I'm not sure there'd be any advantage
at all in a router using it as a hint.
But maybe that's just because the places where I use OSM are
On 5/28/2011 3:39 PM, Nathan Mills wrote:
On Sat, 28 May 2011 15:19:03 -0400, Anthony wrote:
In my experience the difference between primary and trunk is generally
very minor, to the point where I'm not sure there'd be any advantage
at all in a router using it as a hint.
But maybe that's just
On Sat, 28 May 2011 20:54:07 -0400, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
You described your criteria, but did not explain how trunk is more
appropriate than primary for a two lane rural highway between two
small-to-tiny cities. If you use trunk for that, there is no way to
describe (in a way that shows up
On Sat, May 28, 2011 at 9:13 PM, Nathan Mills nat...@nwacg.net wrote:
Take, as an example, US 84 in western Alabama.
FWIW, Google has it as the top level non-motorway. As far as I can
tell there's no other more important east-west road within 50 miles.
What road would you use traveling
On Sat, May 28, 2011 at 9:27 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
On Sat, May 28, 2011 at 9:13 PM, Nathan Mills nat...@nwacg.net wrote:
Take, as an example, US 84 in western Alabama.
FWIW, Google has it as the top level non-motorway. As far as I can
tell there's no other more important
On Sat, 28 May 2011 21:30:50 -0400, Anthony wrote:
Say, Dothan, Alabama to Hattiesburg, Mississippi, avoid motorways.
What should the router take?
In that particular case, it should in fact take US-84. (US-231 to I-10
to US-98 would in fact be faster; I know this having taken both routes,
On 5/28/2011 9:13 PM, Nathan Mills wrote:
So you continue to assert that trunk is most useful if it essentially a
duplicate of primary?
Maybe a duplicate of your version of primary, but not mine.
Take, as an example, US 84 in western Alabama. Why on earth did you
change it to trunk when it's
On 5/28/2011 9:47 PM, Nathan Mills wrote:
Another example is US-71 between Fort Smith and Texarkana. It is in fact
the fastest route between Fort Smith and Texarkana, but it is terribly
slow going. The fact that it is the fastest route between those two
regionally important cities is adequately
On Sat, 28 May 2011 21:51:31 -0400, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
It's been rebuilt as a good-quality four-lane in Mississippi, eastern
Alabama, and Georgia. Alabama has been a little slower at four-laning
than its neighbors, but US 84 in western Alabama is still a direct
route connecting the
On Sat, May 28, 2011 at 10:39 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
On Sat, May 28, 2011 at 9:47 PM, Nathan Mills nat...@nwacg.net wrote:
Primary means (at least according to most of the wiki pages)
the primary non-motorway route between two cities.
Any wiki pages that say that are clearly wrong.
On Sat, 28 May 2011 22:39:51 -0400, Anthony wrote:
On Sat, May 28, 2011 at 9:47 PM, Nathan Mills nat...@nwacg.net
wrote:
Primary means (at least according to most of the wiki pages)
the primary non-motorway route between two cities.
Any wiki pages that say that are clearly wrong. Trunk is
You agree that if a router has two possible roads to take between two
cities, and one is a trunk, and one is a primary, and all other
things
are equal, that the router should choose the trunk, right? Doesn't
that make trunk, by definition, the primary non-motorway route
between
two cities?
On Sat, May 28, 2011 at 10:49 PM, Nathan Mills nat...@nwacg.net wrote:
On Sat, 28 May 2011 22:39:51 -0400, Anthony wrote:
On Sat, May 28, 2011 at 9:47 PM, Nathan Mills nat...@nwacg.net wrote:
Primary means (at least according to most of the wiki pages)
the primary non-motorway route between
On Sat, 28 May 2011 23:00:11 -0400, Anthony wrote:
Instead of giving me hypothetical if..then answers, can you give me a
straightforward answer?
You're trying to get an exact answer to something that isn't an exact
science, so no. I'm allowing for the fact that there may be a situation
in
On 5/28/2011 10:52 PM, Nathan Mills wrote:
Only if trunk has a meaning that implies that a road tagged trunk is
somehow better than a road tagged primary, which it apparently does not,
at least in some people's minds. If you're going to waste trunk on curvy
two lane roads, a router may as well
On Sun, 29 May 2011 00:13:33 -0400, Anthony wrote:
If you want to get people to tag more than two lanes and a
barely-existent shoulder, I think you'd have much more success
creating tags for those features than convincing people that their
area of the country isn't allowed to have any trunks.
On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 12:37 AM, Nathan Mills nat...@nwacg.net wrote:
On Sun, 29 May 2011 00:13:33 -0400, Anthony wrote:
If you want to get people to tag more than two lanes and a
barely-existent shoulder, I think you'd have much more success
creating tags for those features than convincing
On Sun, 29 May 2011 00:13:33 -0400, Anthony wrote:
convincing people that their
area of the country isn't allowed to have any trunks.
Also, why is this any worse than not having a motorway? I don't think
the folks in Newton County Arkansas care a whit whether the main road
through their
On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 12:59 AM, Nathan Mills nat...@nwacg.net wrote:
On Sun, 29 May 2011 00:13:33 -0400, Anthony wrote:
convincing people that their
area of the country isn't allowed to have any trunks.
Also, why is this any worse than not having a motorway?
Why is what worse than not
On Sun, 29 May 2011 00:57:30 -0400, Anthony wrote:
That's quite the misrepresentation of what I'm saying.
It was an exact quote.
You may have heard of the concept of the pull quote. It describes
using partial quotations to misrepresent someone else's position.
Again, my point is
that
On Sun, 29 May 2011 01:04:24 -0400, Anthony wrote:
On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 12:59 AM, Nathan Mills nat...@nwacg.net
wrote:
On Sun, 29 May 2011 00:13:33 -0400, Anthony wrote:
convincing people that their
area of the country isn't allowed to have any trunks.
Also, why is this any worse than
On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 1:08 AM, Nathan Mills nat...@nwacg.net wrote:
On Sun, 29 May 2011 00:57:30 -0400, Anthony wrote:
That's quite the misrepresentation of what I'm saying.
It was an exact quote.
You may have heard of the concept of the pull quote. It describes using
partial quotations
On Sun, 29 May 2011 01:00:25 -0400, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
On 5/29/2011 12:37 AM, Nathan Mills wrote:
US-441 between St. Cloud and Yeehaw Junction could easily be trunk
by
NE2's definition
Nope, since any through traffic will be on the Turnpike. US 441
serves mainly only local and
On 5/27/2011 12:32 AM, Nathan Mills wrote:
Would I be correct in stating that tagging an undivided 2 lane (one lane
in each direction) highways would be improper, even if a state calls the
highway a trunk for planning purposes?
I agree for this case, there is no established convention that can
On 5/27/2011 12:32 AM, Nathan Mills wrote:
Would I be correct in stating that tagging an undivided 2 lane (one lane
in each direction) highways would be improper, even if a state calls the
highway a trunk for planning purposes? Especially if it's in the
middle of a town with a low speed limit. I
On 5/27/2011 9:34 AM, Richard Welty wrote:
On 5/27/11 9:26 AM, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
On 5/27/2011 12:32 AM, Nathan Mills wrote:
Would I be correct in stating that tagging an undivided 2 lane (one lane
in each direction) highways would be improper, even if a state calls the
highway a trunk
On 05/27/2011 09:06 AM, Richard Welty wrote:
if you peruse the wiki, and make a reasonably through search
for definitions of trunk in the US, you will find an extensive
complex of contradictions and inconsistencies.
Maybe someone should find all these and bring it up on the list so that
a
On 5/27/11 12:00 PM, Alex Mauer wrote:
On 05/27/2011 09:06 AM, Richard Welty wrote:
if you peruse the wiki, and make a reasonably through search
for definitions of trunk in the US, you will find an extensive
complex of contradictions and inconsistencies.
Maybe someone should find all these and
On 5/27/2011 10:04 AM, Nathan Mills wrote:
On Fri, 27 May 2011 09:26:41 -0400, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
No, trunk is also used for a major intercity highway that's not a
freeway. Take a look at the UK and their network of trunks.
I'm sorry, I thought I posted to talk-us. My mistake. ;)
Seems
On 5/27/2011 12:00 PM, Alex Mauer wrote:
On 05/27/2011 09:06 AM, Richard Welty wrote:
if you peruse the wiki, and make a reasonably through search
for definitions of trunk in the US, you will find an extensive
complex of contradictions and inconsistencies.
Maybe someone should find all these
Richard Welty rwe...@averillpark.net writes:
On 5/27/11 9:26 AM, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
On 5/27/2011 12:32 AM, Nathan Mills wrote:
Would I be correct in stating that tagging an undivided 2 lane (one lane
in each direction) highways would be improper, even if a state calls the
highway a
by at least one mapper in Kansas. Principal arterials range from
expressways to major two-lane intercity highways.
--
Message: 3
Date: Fri, 27 May 2011 12:21:09 -0400
From: Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com
To: talk-us@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-us] US
On Fri, 27 May 2011 12:17:53 -0400, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
The 'major intercity' road ought to be tagged as primary unless
there's
a specific reason to upgrade, IMO. That leaves the data more useful
to
end users.
Actually that leaves it less useful for users in cities, as then
there are
athan Mills nat...@nwacg.net wrote:
On Fri, 27 May 2011 12:17:53 -0400, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
The 'major intercity' road ought to be tagged as primary unless
there's
a specific reason to upgrade, IMO. That leaves the data more useful
to
end users.
Actually that leaves it less useful
On Fri, 27 May 2011 21:26:53 -0500, John F. Eldredge wrote:
I have driven on quite a few highways here in the USA that vary, mile
by mile, in the number of lanes, how well they are graded, whether or
not driveways connect directly to the highway, etc. This usually
reflects their having been
On 5/27/2011 9:51 PM, Nathan Mills wrote:
On Fri, 27 May 2011 12:17:53 -0400, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
Also, I don't know how major a road between Dumas, TX and Texline, TX
really is. If it weren't a US highway, I'd probably demote it all the
way to secondary.
It's on the National Highway
On 5/27/2011 10:41 PM, Nathan Mills wrote:
Besides, if importance to the route network is the only consideration,
we ought not be using trunk at all or all US highways ought to be
classed as trunk.
Eh? A lot of U.S. Highways are no longer the most important highways,
since they are paralleled
What I've tended to do in my part of Texas is:
Motorway - two or more consecutive intersections with grade separation and
no driveways, or any interstate (some very rural locations do have the
occasional turn off directly from the main travel lanes)
Trunk - US highways without any other reason to
@gmail.comTo: Talk-us talk-us@openstreetmap.orgSent: Tuesday, February 3, 2009 8:49:26 AMSubject: Re: [Talk-us] US Highway Classification (Was: directions of ways in MassGIS data)
What I've tended to do in my part of Texas is:Motorway - two or more consecutive intersections with grade separation and n
77 matches
Mail list logo
