[Tagging] noexit=yes on ways ? (a typical OSM story)

John Packer john.packer7 at gmail.com
Sun Apr 13 19:45:18 UTC 2014


>
> What, in tagging a way, indicates on which end of it is the dead end?
>> I asked that already).
>>
>
> The question does not make sense. Of course the end that is not
> connected to another highway is the dead-end. If the way should not be
> connected to anything on either side it will already be flagged as a
> connectivity error.
>
I think you missed André's point.
If a way has two dead-ends: one of which is an actual dead-end, and another
which is a connectivity error... then the connectivity error is missed
because noexit=yes was used.
Fortunately this doesn't actually happen because *noexit=yes on ways are
ignored* on validators like JOSM.

I think we all agree that tagging a way with noexit=yes isn't exactly an
error, but it has disadvantages (other were cited in this thread) and it
shouldn't be recommended on the wiki.



2014-04-13 16:20 GMT-03:00 Frederik Ramm <frederik at remote.org>:

> Hi,
>
> On 10.04.2014 18:08, André Pirard wrote:
> > In other words, 40% tags (on ways) can't be wrong. But the problem is
> > that 99.+% of these correct tags are mistakes and shouldn't even exist
> > because they do not represent "ways ending near another way", which are
> > the targets of noexit=yes,  but normal dead ends needing no other
> tagging.
>
> I don't see a problem in tagging a normal dead-end with "noexit=yes". It
> doesn't hurt, and adds information (namely that this isn't just a bit
> where I had no time to continue tracing, but a proper "end"). I don't do
> it myself but I'll certainly not make an effort to flag this as "error"
> and get my knickers in a twist about it.
>
> > What, in tagging a way, indicates on which end of it is the dead end?
> > (I asked that already).
>
> The question does not make sense. Of course the end that is not
> connected to another highway is the dead-end. If the way should not be
> connected to anything on either side it will already be flagged as a
> connectivity error.
>
> > What does happen when the way is split or unsplit?
>
> Logically, if you merge a dead-end with a non-dead-end, the result will
> still be a dead-end. If you split a dead-end then one part won't be a
> dead-end and the other will - however, having a way tagged noexit=yes
> which has no dangling ends doesn't seem to be a drastic error to me.
>
> > In fact, is it "the way" or is it "the highway"? Just a segment or more
> > and up to where?
>
> I think you should take a deep breath and calm down.
>
> The bit that is "typical OSM" about this is that people can't cope with
> a bit of fuzziness and then start endless discussions, and in the end
> claim that OSM is doomed, lacks quality, will never work, is ruled by
> idiots, whatever.
>
> > I know who is right: our government who say that OSM is not
> > [necessarily, to remain civil] up to the quality they expect for data. I
> > fear that this does not favor obtaining data from them.
>
> Well who knows if we even want your government's data. Maybe it lacks
> the qualities we are looking for.
>
> > I was enthusiastic, but I now believe less and less in OSM.
>
> Maybe you misunderstood OSM and you are slowly learning what it is, and
> what it is not.
>
> > Please let us ask Osmose to mark as an error any nooexit=yes that is
> > either not on a node or not close to another way.  We could report that
> > action to that government and others as an example that we at least try
> > to put our data right.
>
> I don't think that we have to prove to any government that we are
> "trying to put right" something that is hardly a problem. In fact,
> spending brainpower and time on such a trivial issue would be quite a
> misallocation of resources.
>
> > Now what about some more fun?  Flood tagging noexit=no in the middle of
> > every street?  That wouldn't make 40% but 100% and require a wiki update
> > by those able to understand contributors, wouldn't it? ;-)
>
> Vandalise OSM to prove a point and we'll kick you out. Just so that
> governments around the world can see that we're taking that seriously.
>
> Bye
> Frederik
>
> --
> Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frederik at remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20140413/eaf4fef3/attachment.html>


More information about the Tagging mailing list