<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>Apr 6, 2022, 13:54 by frederik@remote.org:<br></div><blockquote class="tutanota_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid #93A3B8; padding-left: 10px; margin-left: 5px;"><div>Hi,<br></div><div><br></div><div>my thought is that, in general, the default should not be added to OSM. For example, I don't want 95% of streets in Germany to receive a surface=asphalt or a motor_vehicle=yes!<br></div><div><br></div><div>(And I sure as hell don't want someone helpfully adding all those with a bot or a mindless editing campaign where mappers go "ah, what can go wrong, I'll just tag the default"!)<br></div><div><br></div><div>However, there can be situations where these tags could make sense even in Germany, for example when there's a little piece of asphalted road in the midst of cobblestone segments - I would definitely put a surface=asphalt there to avoid someone else coming along and thinking "ah, this little gap in the cobblestone is surely there by accident..."<br></div><div><br></div><div>We need to establish good ways to make country-wide (or region-wide) defaults available in a machine-readable way. Tagging those defaults onto every single object in one country because the default in this country might be different from the default in the next country would (a) create too much data inflation and (b) mean an edit orgy every time the default changes in a place.<br></div></blockquote><div dir="auto">In my experience both (a) and (b) is not some serious problem.<br></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">For (a): it kind of depends on what kind of things would be tagged, but in my opinion:<br></div><div dir="auto">- putting maxweight:signed=no on most of roads on bridges is not some big burden<br></div><div dir="auto">and worth it if it allows to coordinate and find 1 previously unmarked weight limit<br></div><div dir="auto">for every 100 maxweight:signed=no added<br></div><div dir="auto">Disclaimer: I added this StreetComplete quest (and during testing I found several missing<br></div><div dir="auto">weight limits on bridges, in area that I considered as extremely well mapped)<br></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">- placing explicit surface on all ways is a good idea and worth it to catch rare<br></div><div dir="auto">roads which are not surface=asphalt (avoiding sand and cobblestone is critically<br></div><div dir="auto">import while cycling - and such tagging allows systematic verification of all roads,<br></div><div dir="auto">otherwise coordination between mappers is hard to arrange at best)<br></div><div dir="auto">(here I found with StreetComplete some sett/cobblestone roads which were<br></div><div dir="auto">not known to me)<br></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------<br></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">For (b): this defaults change really rarely, and if tagging is well designed then it<br></div><div dir="auto">is easy to change - or maybe not requiring edits at all!<br></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Poland changed implicit urban speed limits (dropping increase to 60 km/h during night)<br></div><div dir="auto">and it was trivially solved by bot edit<br></div><div dir="auto"><a href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_edits/TTmechanicalupdates/Remove_night_time_conditional_speed_restriction_in_urban_areas_in_Poland" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_edits/TTmechanicalupdates/Remove_night_time_conditional_speed_restriction_in_urban_areas_in_Poland</a><br></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">It was a tiny project and not a big challenge.<br></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">And if it would be tagged with maxspeed:type=PL:urban or similar it would not even<br></div><div dir="auto">require editing.<br></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">And if default for say surface=* would change - that is rather reason to mark it explicitly.<br></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------<br></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><blockquote class="tutanota_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid #93A3B8; padding-left: 10px; margin-left: 5px;"><div>For the same reason I am also opposed to mapping implicit speed limits, even though I see that that information can be useful in the absence of machine-readable regional defaults.<br></div></blockquote><div dir="auto">How would you distinguish "urban implicit speed limit" and "rural implicit speed limit"<br></div><div dir="auto">without that?<br></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">At least in Poland areas signed as urban speed limits are different from any administrative<br></div><div dir="auto">areas. And from landuse=residential areas.<br></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">(other countries may have similar differing implicit speed limits which also require survey<br></div><div dir="auto">and are not guessable with any decent accuracy)<br></div> </body>
</html>