Peter,
Couple of comments on your proposals. 1. I've assumed the speeds quoted are the design line speeds. The actual train speeds will depend on the equipment eventually used and spec'd out so I can see that the 400kph might be aspirational in reality. 2. I'd imagine that where the route runs on existing alignment the track for HS2 will be specific for that alone and that everything else will be pushed perhaps to the slow line. Worth checking the detail. As I said also, the main line we have been given is presumably just the trackbed centreline.] Cheers Andy From: petermille...@gmail.com [mailto:petermille...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Peter Miller Sent: 25 January 2012 18:06 To: Andy Robinson Cc: Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] HS2 route is open data! On 24 January 2012 20:29, Andy Robinson <ajrli...@gmail.com> wrote: Fixed now (I hope!). Changeset for the HS2 data is No. 10485263 and relation number is 1986960. Neat! Thanks Andy. I am going to run up the line making a few tweeks. In particular: 1) Add 'proposed=rail' along all elements (to complement the rail=proposed tag) 2) Add a 'proposed:maxspeed=225/250/400' etc based on the info in the 'design_line_speed' tag. 3) Merge the ways (and relation) with existing tracks where HS2 is 100% on top of an existing track alignment which it is going to replace. This certainly appears to be what is planned for part of the route out of London - I will check the docn first. Regards, Peter Cheers Andy From: Andy Robinson [mailto:ajrli...@gmail.com] Sent: 24 January 2012 18:21 To: 'Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org' Subject: RE: [Talk-GB] HS2 route is open data! Please note that it looks like I've managed to upload the data twice (at least some of it anyway). I'll revert and sort. Cheers Andy From: Andy Robinson [mailto:ajrli...@gmail.com] Sent: 24 January 2012 17:19 To: 'Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org' Subject: RE: [Talk-GB] HS2 route is open data! Proposed HS2 route has been added to OSM under changesets 10485788 [1] & 10486240[2]. I've also added all the ways to a relation 1986944 [3] All data added is separate for any other data in OSM. Ie its not connected to any other existing ways. Note that the data provided by DfT appears to be the centreline for the main runs but at junctions separates out to individual tracks. There is a little overlap in these locations and I have not attempted to join the former with the latter. I've also not simplified any ways (additional nodes are only on curves anyway). Tag mapping should be logical. Where both east and west sides have the same construction form (eg cutting) then I have added the appropriate tag. Where the sides differ I have not but the different side designations have been kept throughout (though tag values have been changed to fit better with our way of tagging things). For those interested in the process I took the shp file and used ogr2osm to convert it to an osm file with the script referring to a translation file to map the shp file attributes to osm tags. There was some node duplication and other minor unconnected way issues with the data which I cleaned up manually in JOSM before uploading. Cheers Andy [1] http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/10485788 [2] http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/10486240 [3] http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/1986944 From: Andy Robinson [mailto:ajrli...@gmail.com] Sent: 23 January 2012 22:39 To: 'Peter Miller'; 'David Earl' Cc: 'Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org' Subject: RE: [Talk-GB] HS2 route is open data! I'm separating out the various sections (cutting, tunnel etc) to separate shape files and converting to lat/lon. I'll have a play with it in JOSM once done. I'm splitting with whatever the west side attribute is (the east side may be different where the natural ground slopes etc). I'll put all the various files on dev once I'm done. Cheers Andy From: Peter Miller [mailto:peter.mil...@itoworld.com] Sent: 23 January 2012 20:59 To: David Earl Cc: Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] HS2 route is open data! On 23 January 2012 20:27, David Earl <da...@frankieandshadow.com> wrote: On 23/01/2012 20:21, Jason Cunningham wrote: Good to see the data being released, But.... I don't believe this "proposed" route should yet be added to OSM. You'll regularly here the phrase "map what's on the ground", but we all(?) accept upcoming changes to "what's on the ground" can be mapped, and these upcoming changes to the land are mapped using the proposed tag (then construction tag). By that reasoning we wouldn't map boundaries, as these don't appear "on the ground", they are entirely abstract concepts. The point here is that this is *helpful geographical information*. If the proposal goes away or changes, remove the data. Let's be pragmatic here. I agree that one should not add every aspirational route, however this is much more than an aspiration and there is considerable support for it from official sources. I believe we should indeed add transport proposals where they have committed funding and official firm support. We should of course tag is as 'proposed'. If the project goes ahead we change it to 'consturction', if it goes cold then we delete it. Fyi, I did just that on the Tintewhistle bypass to the east of Manchester. I added it when it was funded and and in the HA plans and then removed it when the public inquiry collapsed a while later. It is of course up to map rendering script to determine if it is appropriate render 'proposed' transport schemes and this will depend on the use to which it is to be put. Mapquest probably wouldn't show them (because mapquest are primarily providing maps for the traveler. OSM Mapnik will probably show it because it tries to map almost everything. Other mapping outlets can make their own decision. Good news re rendering HS2 for use in Potlatch. One suggestion... I notice that the shape file contains details of cuttings, embankments, bridges (and viaducts) and tunnels. Could you present that using distinct colours or textures or something? It is tagged separately for each side of the route, ie eastside=cutting. Regards, Peter We also seem to mark routes of old railways for which there is no evidence on the ground. (Quite why, I don't know, and this raises the question again of representing any historical data, but that was discussed at length recently). David _______________________________________________ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb _______________________________________________ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
_______________________________________________ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb