<div dir="auto">Most of this looks unobjectionable to me except for guidance to tag major surface streets in urban/suburban areas as primary, especially the recommendation that "in a large enough city, surface streets with an exit from a motorway would likely qualify as primary." Not only will it lead to too much visual noise in urban and especially suburban areas (where roads tend to be overbuilt relative to their function), I don't think garden-variety urban arteries are of the same category of importance as the major intra-regional routes definition this tagging proposal defines for 'primary'.<div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">The current US highway tagging guideline states that "a few major urban arterials also may merit highway=primary *if and only if* they provide a clearly better routing (higher speeds and fewer delays arising from traffic signals, stop signs, or other obstructions) than available urban arterials bearing highway=secondary." I think this makes more sense with respect to the proposed classification scheme and respects the precedent that urban arteries/surface roads are generally 'secondary' - providing "links" in the national roadway network, but not carrying a major route themselves.</div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Tue, May 18, 2021, 4:06 AM <<a href="mailto:talk-us-request@openstreetmap.org">talk-us-request@openstreetmap.org</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Send Talk-us mailing list submissions to<br>
<a href="mailto:talk-us@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">talk-us@openstreetmap.org</a><br>
<br>
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit<br>
<a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us</a><br>
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to<br>
<a href="mailto:talk-us-request@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">talk-us-request@openstreetmap.org</a><br>
<br>
You can reach the person managing the list at<br>
<a href="mailto:talk-us-owner@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">talk-us-owner@openstreetmap.org</a><br>
<br>
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific<br>
than "Re: Contents of Talk-us digest..."<br>
<br>
<br>
Today's Topics:<br>
<br>
1. OpenStreetMap extracts and wahoo bicycle computers (Richard Welty)<br>
2. Re: OpenStreetMap extracts and wahoo bicycle computers<br>
(Harald Kliems)<br>
3. Update on potential highway classification reform<br>
(Brian M. Sperlongano)<br>
4. Re: OpenStreetMap extracts and wahoo bicycle computers<br>
(Richard Welty)<br>
5. Re: Update on potential highway classification reform<br>
(Frederik Ramm)<br>
<br>
<br>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<br>
<br>
Message: 1<br>
Date: Mon, 17 May 2021 16:42:32 -0400<br>
From: Richard Welty <<a href="mailto:rwelty@averillpark.net" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">rwelty@averillpark.net</a>><br>
To: Talk Openstreetmap <<a href="mailto:talk-us@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">talk-us@openstreetmap.org</a>><br>
Subject: [Talk-us] OpenStreetMap extracts and wahoo bicycle computers<br>
Message-ID: <<a href="mailto:dad7e2e2-79b1-908f-33e0-642cbd962104@averillpark.net" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">dad7e2e2-79b1-908f-33e0-642cbd962104@averillpark.net</a>><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8<br>
<br>
is anyone aware if OSM map extracts can be used with wahoo bike<br>
computers? i'm evaluating various computers for a purchase in<br>
a couple of months and this might impact my choice.<br>
<br>
thanks,<br>
richard<br>
-- <br>
<a href="mailto:rwelty@averillpark.net" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">rwelty@averillpark.net</a><br>
Averill Park Networking - GIS & IT Consulting<br>
OpenStreetMap - PostgreSQL - Linux<br>
Java - Web Applications - Search<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
Message: 2<br>
Date: Mon, 17 May 2021 16:25:12 -0500<br>
From: Harald Kliems <<a href="mailto:kliems@gmail.com" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">kliems@gmail.com</a>><br>
To: Richard Welty <<a href="mailto:rwelty@averillpark.net" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">rwelty@averillpark.net</a>><br>
Cc: Talk Openstreetmap <<a href="mailto:talk-us@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">talk-us@openstreetmap.org</a>><br>
Subject: Re: [Talk-us] OpenStreetMap extracts and wahoo bicycle<br>
computers<br>
Message-ID:<br>
<<a href="mailto:CACwR0F8b2AJsPsS3Ue21VuDE_GP4FuanaZTNVM5pqJoaksf1Vg@mail.gmail.com" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">CACwR0F8b2AJsPsS3Ue21VuDE_GP4FuanaZTNVM5pqJoaksf1Vg@mail.gmail.com</a>><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"<br>
<br>
I guess you mean customized OSM map extracts, rather than the OSM-based<br>
maps that they supply (and don't update all that frequently...)? I am not<br>
aware of such an option, and based on my experience with the Wahoo<br>
ecosystem, it seems unlikely. But if someone knows otherwise, I'd love to<br>
hear about it.<br>
Harald.<br>
<br>
On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 3:46 PM Richard Welty <<a href="mailto:rwelty@averillpark.net" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">rwelty@averillpark.net</a>><br>
wrote:<br>
<br>
> is anyone aware if OSM map extracts can be used with wahoo bike<br>
> computers? i'm evaluating various computers for a purchase in<br>
> a couple of months and this might impact my choice.<br>
><br>
> thanks,<br>
> richard<br>
> --<br>
> <a href="mailto:rwelty@averillpark.net" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">rwelty@averillpark.net</a><br>
> Averill Park Networking - GIS & IT Consulting<br>
> OpenStreetMap - PostgreSQL - Linux<br>
> Java - Web Applications - Search<br>
><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> Talk-us mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:Talk-us@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">Talk-us@openstreetmap.org</a><br>
> <a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us</a><br>
><br>
-------------- next part --------------<br>
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<br>
URL: <<a href="http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/attachments/20210517/fcf194db/attachment-0001.htm" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/attachments/20210517/fcf194db/attachment-0001.htm</a>><br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
Message: 3<br>
Date: Mon, 17 May 2021 17:54:32 -0400<br>
From: "Brian M. Sperlongano" <<a href="mailto:zelonewolf@gmail.com" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">zelonewolf@gmail.com</a>><br>
To: talk-us <<a href="mailto:talk-us@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">talk-us@openstreetmap.org</a>><br>
Subject: [Talk-us] Update on potential highway classification reform<br>
Message-ID:<br>
<<a href="mailto:CAMrfQx0zJLXX%2BkSV%2BjkTeDqVGx5rx2QM0kTQ06A6oSWaxgOhrQ@mail.gmail.com" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">CAMrfQx0zJLXX+kSV+jkTeDqVGx5rx2QM0kTQ06A6oSWaxgOhrQ@mail.gmail.com</a>><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"<br>
<br>
Hi Folks,<br>
<br>
I'd like to provide the community an update on the work that's been<br>
happening to improve the current state of US highway classifications.<br>
Following the recent talk-us threads, there were extensive debates in<br>
Slack, especially in the #local-us-northeast channel, about how to better<br>
apply the highway classification values with international norms,<br>
especially the trunk classification, which seems to be the most challenging.<br>
<br>
There was a strong consensus initially amongst New England mappers that the<br>
highway classifications should be used in a way that's consistent with the<br>
connectivity importance of various roads. There was also a general<br>
agreement that documenting state-specific highway classification criteria<br>
was important for preventing edit wars as well as documenting edge or<br>
unusual cases and the rationale behind them.<br>
<br>
The outcome of those discussions was the following wiki page[1], which<br>
offers general guidelines that can be applied in state-specific ways to<br>
come up with criteria that mappers can follow. As part of these<br>
discussions, local mappers have been drafting state-specific pages that<br>
would implement these general guidelines. State-specific criteria have<br>
been drafted so far for: MA, MS, NH, RI, VT, TX, and WA.<br>
<br>
In order to demonstrate what the new classification would look like on the<br>
map, the New England mappers have put together a temporary live demo[2]<br>
which shows what this new arrangement would look like at the motorway and<br>
trunk level. This demo is set up to show the proposed "new" highway<br>
classification alignment in *four* New England states only: VT, NH, MA, and<br>
RI. The rest of the country is shown with no change to highway<br>
classification. In addition, this demo map is rigged to show<br>
motorway/trunk at their normal zoom levels, but suppress highway=secondary<br>
until zoomed in close, in order to specifically examine the motorway/trunk<br>
network in better detail.<br>
<br>
Links:<br>
<br>
[1] <a href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_States/Highway_classification" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_States/Highway_classification</a><br>
[2] <a href="http://74.97.52.189:6789/openstreetmap-carto/#7/43.250/-70.756" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">http://74.97.52.189:6789/openstreetmap-carto/#7/43.250/-70.756</a><br>
<br>
I offer this update as an invitation to further collaboration on how we<br>
might better map highway classifications in the US.<br>
-------------- next part --------------<br>
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<br>
URL: <<a href="http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/attachments/20210517/a4ff2948/attachment-0001.htm" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/attachments/20210517/a4ff2948/attachment-0001.htm</a>><br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
Message: 4<br>
Date: Mon, 17 May 2021 20:09:31 -0400<br>
From: Richard Welty <<a href="mailto:rwelty@averillpark.net" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">rwelty@averillpark.net</a>><br>
To: Harald Kliems <<a href="mailto:kliems@gmail.com" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">kliems@gmail.com</a>><br>
Cc: Talk Openstreetmap <<a href="mailto:talk-us@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">talk-us@openstreetmap.org</a>><br>
Subject: Re: [Talk-us] OpenStreetMap extracts and wahoo bicycle<br>
computers<br>
Message-ID: <<a href="mailto:52e31595-2494-363f-5cf7-90766f7899bf@averillpark.net" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">52e31595-2494-363f-5cf7-90766f7899bf@averillpark.net</a>><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8<br>
<br>
quite. on of my pet peeves (which i likely share with many) is the<br>
infrequency of map updates from commercial vendors, and the use of<br>
OSM maps without regular updates is pretty annoying.<br>
<br>
richard<br>
<br>
<br>
On 5/17/21 5:25 PM, Harald Kliems wrote:<br>
> I guess you mean customized OSM map extracts, rather than the OSM-based<br>
> maps that they supply (and don't update all that frequently...)? I am<br>
> not aware of such an option, and based on my experience with the Wahoo<br>
> ecosystem, it seems unlikely. But if someone knows otherwise, I'd love<br>
> to hear about it.<br>
> Harald.<br>
> <br>
> On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 3:46 PM Richard Welty <<a href="mailto:rwelty@averillpark.net" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">rwelty@averillpark.net</a><br>
> <mailto:<a href="mailto:rwelty@averillpark.net" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">rwelty@averillpark.net</a>>> wrote:<br>
> <br>
> is anyone aware if OSM map extracts can be used with wahoo bike<br>
> computers? i'm evaluating various computers for a purchase in<br>
> a couple of months and this might impact my choice.<br>
> <br>
> thanks,<br>
> richard<br>
> -- <br>
> <a href="mailto:rwelty@averillpark.net" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">rwelty@averillpark.net</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:rwelty@averillpark.net" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">rwelty@averillpark.net</a>><br>
> Averill Park Networking - GIS & IT Consulting<br>
> OpenStreetMap - PostgreSQL - Linux<br>
> Java - Web Applications - Search<br>
> <br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> Talk-us mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:Talk-us@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">Talk-us@openstreetmap.org</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:Talk-us@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">Talk-us@openstreetmap.org</a>><br>
> <a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us</a><br>
> <<a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us</a>><br>
> <br>
<br>
<br>
-- <br>
<a href="mailto:rwelty@averillpark.net" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">rwelty@averillpark.net</a><br>
Averill Park Networking - GIS & IT Consulting<br>
OpenStreetMap - PostgreSQL - Linux<br>
Java - Web Applications - Search<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
Message: 5<br>
Date: Tue, 18 May 2021 10:18:42 +0200<br>
From: Frederik Ramm <<a href="mailto:frederik@remote.org" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">frederik@remote.org</a>><br>
To: <a href="mailto:talk-us@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">talk-us@openstreetmap.org</a><br>
Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Update on potential highway classification<br>
reform<br>
Message-ID: <<a href="mailto:b7f76bd2-e03e-15fb-6eb6-a8b6d49050e2@remote.org" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">b7f76bd2-e03e-15fb-6eb6-a8b6d49050e2@remote.org</a>><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed<br>
<br>
Brian,<br>
<br>
this is probably clear to you but I want to be extra sure.<br>
<br>
Your previous attempts at "tagging harmoniztation" in other areas - I am <br>
thinking mainly of riverbanks here - have occasionally met with <br>
criticism because they were perceived as essentially "Brian and few of <br>
his friends coming up with something and then making everyone believe <br>
that theirs is the new standard". People have unwittingly started to <br>
push trough your "new standard" in areas where they did not have the <br>
buy-in from local community, finding themselves (unexpectedly) in hot water.<br>
<br>
Therefore I applaud your detailed documentation and your reaching out to <br>
this mailing list, but - appealing to everyone involved here! - this can <br>
only be a beginning. Please always keep in mind that you cannot change <br>
the road classification system for a whole US state just because three <br>
people on Slack gave it a nod; you will need get broad community buy-in <br>
*especially* if you plan to organise massive changes to the existing <br>
system. Thousands of mappers in the US have gotten used to the current <br>
system and they will need to be brought on board with whatever changes <br>
are planned.<br>
<br>
This is not something where the organisers can shift responsibility onto <br>
the individual mapper in a "uh, we only set up the task manager, it is <br>
individual mappers who grabbed a region and followed our instructions" <br>
kind of way.<br>
<br>
I appreciate that your wiki pages are very carefully worded at present, <br>
so I am probably preaching to the choir here; I assume that you know <br>
full well about the diligence required in such operations!<br>
<br>
Bye<br>
Frederik<br>
<br>
-- <br>
Frederik Ramm ## eMail <a href="mailto:frederik@remote.org" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">frederik@remote.org</a> ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
Subject: Digest Footer<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Talk-us mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Talk-us@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">Talk-us@openstreetmap.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us</a><br>
<br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
End of Talk-us Digest, Vol 162, Issue 33<br>
****************************************<br>
</blockquote></div>