[Tagging] your advice please about corrections to tagging instructions

[André Pirard]

Hello 2,

Not sure what's going on out there.  I received a reject from both lists
for 40KB and 80KB excess but it seems that the post to talk-be went
through anyway.
Well, I put the second part of the e-mail here
<http://www.papou.byethost9.com/tmp/OSM_advice/> and I'm resending
fingers crossed and sorry for possible dupe.

Thanks,
Cheers,

André.


------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hello,

May I ask for your advice about the proposed corrections (below) to this
tagger instructions tables
<http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Road_signs_in_Belgium>?
Please reply to this e-mail, with a ±1 under each table pair or once
ahead of them all, or just C3=±1, C3bis=±1, ...
You may indicate your tagging alongside a -1 or +1 (OK but yours
better); discussions should be kept apart and later, thanks.
Please note that F99c is ubiquitous for "vehicles prohibited" while the
other F99 seem for so-tagged "designated".

If you browse the table, still as under construction as the OSM map, any
suggestion for improvements is welcome later.
Let's thank Eimai <http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Eimai> for
the impressive work in making this table.
I'm lending a cheerful hand, many missing signs, TOC and anchors, a few
errors, ...
(I recommend for such data not only the TOC but mostly the anchors of
which you can copy the URL to link to any particular sign.)

Why the corrections?  Because, importantly enough, those tags cause GPS
routing errors. In particular, none of the F99x signs means any
restriction at all and I made some OSM map corrections because they let
cars pass where they shouldn't.  It's urgent because of the spreading.

Why polling?  Because of these rejecting counter arguments (mainly
regarding C3bis (+destination)):
- no-one will do this, no editor will do this, no person will do this.
Almost everyone in Belgium who encountered an "uitgezonderd plaatselijk
verkeer" sign has tagged it with access= destination. No-one will
systematically add all the tags needed to translate that to their own
vehicle tree. Some that try will forget one or more vehicle type etc.
- if you say that the "vehicle" class doesn't include horse drivers,
well, it also doesn't include cattle, pack animals etc. They also have
drivers, which is what the C3 sign prohibits. Drive a camel or an
elephant and you're not allowed. Not very likely maybe, but
nevertheless, walk next to a cow to move it between two fields and you
have become a driver. Tagging a simple C3 sign will be a lot of fun.
- Hence, in Belgium, "vehicle" will include all things that have a
driver, because that suits our traffic code best. I've always held the
belief that tagging should be as straight forward as possible and that
one traffic sign (or more specifically: one element of information on a
traffic sign) should preferably translate to one tag in OSM.

My opinion:
- a GPS does not know the specifics of Belgium. It obeys the OSM rules
blindly and what I did is translate the Belgian rules to OSM rules strictly.
- tagging instructions must not indicate what the users do but what OSM
dictates;  laziness is no valid reason for bad tagging.
- regarding the ménagerie: I do not understand. C3bis obviously does not
cope with other animals than horses because IMHO there is no OSM class
for them (if there had been I would have cared for it). But would it be
useful as there's no GPS setting for each animal and shepherds rarely
use a GPS?
- on the other hand, and much more importantly than those animals, at
the sole cost of a more correct access->vehicle modification, the new
tags correctly admit the pedestrians and horses that were wrongly
rejected, and the only addition needed is bicycle=yes to make it all-right.
- single tag tagging would require modification of the software and
rules, more of this later, I hope.
- very importantly, like in the early days of Wikipedia, OSM is living a
period of enthusiastic, wild activity; if it is based on missing,
partial or personal rules, we will regret it but, like Wikipedia too,
the taggers, especially bulk ones, will have little incentive to revise
much of what they have done before.

Thanks,
Cheers,

André.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20131007/0816d41b/attachment.html>