Thanks Sam: some thoughts below... >>>The Dempster Highway portion that physically has the 'TCT logo' needs to have a relation route. Eeerm, OK, didn't really clock many of those logos, and especially not where they started and ended!
>>>However, it CAN be tagged as a 'rcn bicycle route' because in that province it is a 'regional cycle route'. >>>If it is not provincially designated 'state=proposed' works just fine. >>>And even route=ncn state=proposed would also work. I'll have to look into that to see what it is designated as. >>>On a national scale, the TCT is not a 'National Cycle Trail' but a 'mixed use greenway with different designated uses' >>>(that in turn, makes me pull my hair out) Gotta love Canada! >>>Also, the entire highway should be tagged with a relation route, for its highway designation. Not sure I understand this - so just setting "highway=primary" and "name=Demspter Highway" isn't enough? (I'm fairly new at this, so go easy...!) >>>The actual name of the road should not say 'Trans Canada Trail'. Luckily, it says Dempster Highway! >>>When your done marking where where the physical road is, please let me know, then we can figure out what the best answer is. :) Well, I'm done marking the physical route, so this can progress. During the trip I kept a timed log of 'select' (i.e. when I remembered or had access to the laptop) POI's, including some laybys, campgrounds etc. I'll be adding those later once I find a good way of matching those up with the GPX track. >>>Overall, my aim is to get the entire network that is bicycle=yes as well as foot=yes for the entire country, so at a minimum, the actual >>>road/track/path/footway/cycleway is actually mapped first. >>>Then we can muck about with relations & labels at a later date. >>>So ya, maybe the better answer is to say 'yup, sure You are local expert, since i have never been there, its not my place to say how it should be >>>tagged'. I definitely saw cyclists on there, at all points of the journey. I saw no walkers, but you could walk it if you wanted! On 3/17/10, Tim Francois <sk1pp...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > OK, so I came into some free time and completed the tracing of the > Dempster Highway into OSM. Some points: > > 1) I have tagged it as a primary highway. It is, after all, called the > Dempster Highway. Also, it is the only ground link to Inuvik, thus > fairly important > 2) I have tagged the surface as gravel. > 3) I came across an unfinished Dempster Highway portion in Northern > Yukon. This was tagged as a tertiary highway, and as part of the > Trans-Canada Trail (ncn and ncn_ref attributes). I deleted the > portions for which I had accurate GPS traces, and merged the two > somewhere inside of NT, changing the highway to primary. > 4) The entire Dempster Highway is now tagged as a Trans-Canada Trail. > 5) I've also tagged as bicycle=yes, as a) I saw many cyclists and b) > the tertiary route I came across also had this! > > I'll be adding in further POI's along the route when I can extract my > diary files, and going on to update the rest of what we travelled in > the summer. > > Question: Is there a Trans-Canada Trail relation I should have used? > Couldn't find one... > > Tim > > -----Original Message----- > From: James Ewen <ve6...@gmail.com> > To: Talk-CA OpenStreetMap <talk-ca@openstreetmap.org> > Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] Highways in Yukon > Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2010 19:59:25 -0700 > > On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 7:18 PM, Richard Weait <rich...@weait.com> wrote: > >>> One has to think about how the final map is going to be displayed. >> >> Now that is a little close to tagging for the renderer. > > Yes, but I've been chastised about that statement before... we are not > tagging incorrectly to simply work around the renderer rules, but > rather tagging as to road classification importance, which the > renderer simply renders differently. If the data stored in the OSM > database is not useful to the user, then it may as well not be > included. > > Back to my GPS... the major roads in the TeleAtlas database cause > routing problems. The routing routine will take me on a 350 km detour > just to stay on highways, rather than a 200 km direct route on what it > considers a major road. These major roads are indistinguishable from > the highways as far as physical features are concerned. Speed limits > are also identical. > > I'd prefer to have these major roads promoted to the same > classification as the highways (in fact they are highways of the same > classification as the others)... as a side effect, the renderer in the > GPS would end up showing these roads that were previously not visible. > > Just because the renderer changes the display doesn't mean that I am > specifically trying to misrepresent the road for the renderer. > > The renderers take the tags we use into account when deciding on how > to display a way, so it is only appropriate that we also take into > account how the renderer will display the tags we are deciding to use. > > It would be inappropriate to tag a stream as a coastline just to get > it to show up on a wide area map... it is however appropriate in my > opinion to tag an important major road (read only road) across a large > expanse of territory at an appropriate classification level, despite > what the rendering engines will do with it. > > The database and renderers are pretty much married to each other. > Without the database, the renderers are useless. Without the > renderers, it's pretty hard to visualize the data. > > James > VE6SRV > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-ca mailing list > Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca > > > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-ca mailing list > Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca > -- Twitter: @Acrosscanada Blog: http://Acrosscanadatrails.blogspot.com Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/sam.vekemans Skype: samvekemans OpenStreetMap IRC: http://irc.openstreetmap.org @Acrosscanadatrails _______________________________________________ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
