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 2008/7/10 David Ebling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Steve, I would suggest you reconsider doing this. > > I would strongly support the use of highway=road for new roads that no > information is available for, eg from a trace that was done with a car but > no notes were made. > > However, by retagging "unclassified" to "road" you are essentially deleting > information from the database that you don't know to be incorrect. Sure, if > you know the classification is correct, change it, but don't just delete it > - it could be correct. > > For what it's worth, I work on the following basis for UK road > classifications: > * trunk/primary/secondary - as signed. > * tertiary - other roads that predominantly have a white line of some sort > down the centre. These tend to be wider roads used by more traffic. I > believe OS maps use a similar distinction, and I think it's useful for > planning routes, both with a map or automatically. > * unclassified - roads without a centre line. If they are too narrow for > passing, I add lanes=1. > > On this basis I have mapped a great number of unclassified roads. It would > be a real shame if you deleted this information that I had carefully > collected. > > I accept that there are a large number of incorrectly tagged roads out > 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; format=flowed; charset=US-ASCII > > > > > > 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 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. So > > I'm wondering about the merits of changing *all* the > > highway=unclassified roads in the area to highway=road so > > that the whole > > lot can be classified appropriately from scratch. This > > would make it > > obvious which roads really are unclassified and which need > > to be checked. > > > > What are peoples' views on this? I imagine that much > > of the OSM world is > > affected in the same way, and this renders the > > highway=unclassified tag > > relatively meaningless in it's current state. Should > > there be a global > > reclassification to fix this, or is there a better way? > > > > - Steve > > xmpp:[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > sip:[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > http://www.nexusuk.org/ > > > __________________________________________________________ > Not happy with your email address?. > Get the one you really want - millions of new email addresses available now > at Yahoo! http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/ymail/new.html > > _______________________________________________ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk >
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
