<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>7 cze 2022, 13:54 od tomasstraupis@gmail.com:<br></div><blockquote class="tutanota_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid #93A3B8; padding-left: 10px; margin-left: 5px;"><div>2022-06-07, an, 14:24 Mateusz Konieczny via Talk-lt rašė:<br></div><blockquote><div>It seems to have no benefits whatsoever and is problematic from cartographic,<br></div><div>consistency, QA and other perspectives.<br></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Well, since you claim you have knowledge in cartography, can you<br></div><div>elaborate on which cartographic rules is this breaking? <br></div></blockquote><div dir="auto">For start I want to note that paved/unpaved distinction can be more<br></div><div dir="auto">important that general road importance for some purposes <br></div><div dir="auto">- but in such case surface=* data would be used and shown<br></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">And yes, you can get rid of some bad effects by automatically fixing<br></div><div dir="auto">invalid data (degrading isolated highway=secondary to highway=tertiary)<br></div><div dir="auto">- but having bunch of such rules for each region is obnoxious and pointless<br></div><div dir="auto">where classification was simply badly done in the first place.<br></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">It is also, obviously, causing cartographic issues only when secondary and<br></div><div dir="auto"><div>tertiary roads are shown differently.<br></div></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">But in cases where there is attempt to use highway=secondary/tertiary<br></div><div dir="auto">according to its purpose (overall importance in road network) then having<br></div><div dir="auto">such short sections is problematic at least for following reasons:<br></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">- reduced map legibility for no benefit<br></div><div dir="auto">- losing ability to show road network properly without preprocessing that would<br></div><div dir="auto">remove bad classification (obvious example is attempt to show only highway=secondary<br></div><div dir="auto">and more important roads that will give you also random segments of paved<br></div><div dir="auto">highway=tertiary)<br></div><div dir="auto">- highly unusual abberation (in case of maps on scale larger than Lithuania)<br></div><div dir="auto">- road importance in road network is not changing in this case, this<br></div><div dir="auto">data is outright false<br></div><div dir="auto">- confusing for no good reason<br></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">It makes much harder (but not impossible) to have well done maps that<br></div><div dir="auto">show (among other things) general road importance<br></div><blockquote class="tutanota_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid #93A3B8; padding-left: 10px; margin-left: 5px;"><div dir="auto">Given that<br></div><div>paved and unpaved segments have actually different rules/procedures of<br></div><div>maintenance - therefore such depiction is actually communicating<br></div><div>correct and important information to the map reader.<br></div></blockquote><div dir="auto">if someone wants to show paved/unpaved status then they should use<br></div><div dir="auto">surface=* tags, not mistag road importance and force render to show<br></div><div dir="auto">paved/unpaved status despite that it attempts to show overal road <br></div><div dir="auto">imprtance ( <a href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Mistagging_for_the_renderer">https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Mistagging_for_the_renderer</a> )<br></div><blockquote class="tutanota_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid #93A3B8; padding-left: 10px; margin-left: 5px;"><div> Also what specific QA problems does this raise? Can you provide some examples?<br></div></blockquote><div dir="auto">Disjointed road classes are serious problem and reported by QA<br></div><div dir="auto">capable of analysing road network graphs, in Lithuania this reports<br></div><div dir="auto">are harder to process and distinguish from tagging sadly treated as OK.<br></div><blockquote class="tutanota_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid #93A3B8; padding-left: 10px; margin-left: 5px;"><div> We have some small stretches of motorway being marked by official<br></div><div>signs as not a motorway (for one reason or another but with real<br></div><div>influence on maxspeed, permissions etc.), would you also suggest<br></div><div>ignore the physical reality and tag those parts as motorway anyway<br></div><div>just for the sake of continuity?<br></div></blockquote><div dir="auto">Not sure, would need to be more familiar with specific cases<br></div><div dir="auto">and I would say "it depends".<br></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">But some cases known to me involved nonmotorway section with<br></div><div dir="auto">traffic lights, sharp turns etc. In such case it should not be marked <br></div><div dir="auto">as motorway.<br></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">I also heard about cases where motorway was not officialy motorway<br></div><div dir="auto">for only political reasons - in such case it likely should be highway=motorway<br></div><blockquote class="tutanota_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid #93A3B8; padding-left: 10px; margin-left: 5px;"><div>P.S. Sometimes roads do change their state/appearance drastically on<br></div><div>the borders. Besides, which country should be less important and<br></div><div>change their classification?<br></div></blockquote><div dir="auto">Ideally it would be discussed and some agreement reached.<br></div><div dir="auto">And in general, road importance is not changing much.<br></div><div dir="auto">State/appearance is correlated with=* and rigid classification<br></div><div dir="auto">of highway=* based on road quality is a mistake<br></div> </body>
</html>