[talk-au] Mapping shared driveways

Wed Mar 16 10:47:55 UTC 2022

Thanks for the feedback on the shared driveways. 

I was wondering if you would take the same approach to similar shared driveways  that lead to commercial properties as per ways in residential areas? 
Refer to examples below:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/698542896

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/595212641

regards,
Sebastian

> On 16 Mar 2022, at 12:15 pm, Dian Ågesson <me at diacritic.xyz> wrote:
> 
> 
> Hey Matthew,
> 
> I think the distinction is inherited from the distinction between highway=service and highway=residential. A “regular” driveway shouldn’t be a residential road, and a narrow, but otherwise unremarkable residential road doesn’t become a service road.
> 
> I do feel as though there is some overlap between highway=residential and highway=service as they are used. I’ve seen some residential roads tagged as service roads because they are “less important” or narrower than surrounding roads; possibly in order to affect the rendering. If a residential road is narrow enough though, it can be tagged as alley.
> 
> If I had to try and define the difference, it’d probably be based on whether the road is accessing a “single property” or not. The wiki definition of “highway=service” is for access roads to a building, servo, beach, campsite, industrial estate, business park, etc. This would suggest that it is appropriate for roads that access a large property with multiple tenants, which could be analogous to a subdivided parcel of land with multiple units. Having a street name should generally be the giveaway, some googling also suggests that the lack of footpaths, streetlights, etc are other common features.
> 
> Ultimately though it’s subjective, and Seb’s examples are probably three perfect examples of edge cases.
> 
> Example 1 (818426144): Agree that highway=residential is not appropriate here. It looks like a driveway from the road functions, but the actual  properties seem to access from shared driveways branched off of the main way: personally I’d say highway=service with five pups gems branching off, but I wouldn’t “correct” the main branch if it had been tagged as a pipe stem as well. It does happen to be very long, though: if it was given a gazetted name, with each house getting renumbered accordingly, I think residential would be a justifiable alternative. The way north of this (181739516) is an example of just that: the mapper has gone with a plain highway=service, but residential would have been my first choice.
> 
> The second example, Tilbavale Close, doesn’t look like a driveway, has individually numbered properties, and (for lack of a more scientific word) doesn’t “feel” like a driveway. It’s a narrow residential street. The funny spurs coming off the Close (184844140), even though they are part of the gazetted roadway, do look like shared driveways.
> 
> The last example (Cassugan Court) looks like like a driveway from the road, but someone has gone and gazetted a name and numbered the properties with it. Each property does have their own driveway branching off of it, though, so I’d say this looks like the most “driveway-ish” a road could be while still being highway=residential. If I came across this with a plain highway=service tag though, I’m not sure I’d correct it.
> 
>  It might be easier to define a pipe stem/shared driveway by what it isn’t: it isn’t a through road, it isn’t any narrow residential road, it isn’t any “short” residential road, etc…
> 
> Dian
> 
>> On 2022-03-16 11:17, Matthew Seale wrote:
>> 
>> So what then distinguishes highway=residential from a shared driveway in Sebastian's 3 examples?
>>  
>> * The first way 818426144 is an unnamed shared service road, so seems to neatly fit the pipestem example as explained.  The addresses in this style of development are likely to be unit numbers, otherwise sharing a shared main road street addresss.
>> * The second way 184844142 and the third way 429541974 are named roads that appear as named roads on the JOSM Vicmap road network layer.  The addresses in these instances will most likely use that street name as their address, not the next main road they connect to.   So these don't appear to neatly fit the concept of a shared driveway to my thinking.
>>  
>> Otherwise taken to it's extreme interpretation there would be a large number of highway=residential that, due to being in privately developed areas, could be change to pipestem.  I don't think that is the intent.
>>  
>> Thoughts?
>>  
>> Matthew
>>  
>> On Wed, Mar 16, 2022 at 9:42 AM Dian Ågesson <me at diacritic.xyz> wrote:
>> Interesting discussion; it does seem like the consensus is landing on the side of service=pipestem.
>> 
>> There are 668 instances of driveway=pipestem in Australia: https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1gU6, but there is 0 instances of service=pipestem: https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1gUd. However, it seems as though I have had a disproportionate influence (509 of driveway=pipestem were last edited by me https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1gUf)
>> 
>> I don't have a strong preference either way, so I'm happy to move over to the service=pipestem structure (possibly through bulk edit?)
>> 
>> Dian
>> 
>> On 2022-03-16 08:53, Andrew Harvey wrote:
>> 
>> In the global community it's still disputed, see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Tag:service%3Ddriveway#Pipestems and my proposal to have this as an editor preset https://github.com/openstreetmap/id-tagging-schema/pull/239 where the tagging question is still not resolved.
>>  
>> I've actually come around to the idea that service=pipstem is better, rational being that service=driveway is very clearly defined on the wiki as a non-shared driveway leading to a single residence. I think it's best we leave that intact and have a sibling tag service=pipestem for shared driveways. Otherwise you'll need to redefine service=driveway to be any type of shared or non-shared driveway and add a new tag driveway=single to most existing highway=service.
>> 
>> On Wed, 16 Mar 2022 at 08:10, Tom Brennan <website at ozultimate.com> wrote:
>> I think I started the last discussion on this, so I'll wade in! 
>> Driveways are a bit of a nightmare - there are lots that don't fit 
>> neatly into one bucket or another.
>> 
>> We did agree that service=driveway, driveway=pipestem was better than 
>> service=pipestem.
>> 
>> It's probably 6 of one, half a dozen of the other as to whether the ones 
>> below are all shared driveways. Some could equally be classified as 
>> private residential roads.
>> 
>> But they could all do with a clean up, one way or the other!
>> 
>> cheers
>> Tom
>> ----
>> Canyoning? try http://ozultimate.com/canyoning
>> Bushwalking? try http://bushwalkingnsw.com
>> 
>> On 15/03/2022 9:22 pm, Dian Ågesson wrote:
>> > 
>> > 
>> > Hi Seb!
>> > 
>> > The last time this came up on the mailing list 
>> > (https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/2021-September/015014.html) 
>> > most people seemed to approve of the following mapping:
>> > 
>> > highway=service
>> > 
>> > service=driveway
>> > 
>> > driveway=pipestem
>> > 
>> > Dian
>> > 
>> > On 2022-03-15 20:16, Sebastian Azagra via Talk-au wrote:
>> > 
>> >> Hi all,
>> >>
>> >> Had a query regarding the mapping of driveways / shared  driveways as 
>> >> there seems to be quite a number of different approaches in the data.
>> >> Below are three examples of similar ways that have different tags used 
>> >> in each instance.
>> >>
>> >> Highway=service
>> >> Service= driveway
>> >> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/818426144
>> >>
>> >> Highway=Residential
>> >> Service= driveway 
>> >> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/184844142#map=18/-38.00126/145.27585
>> >>
>> >> Highway=residential
>> >> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/429541974
>> >>
>> >> Reading the OSM wiki, none of these ways are correctly mapped as they 
>> >> are all shared driveways that leads from a road. my understanding that 
>> >> they need to be tagged as follows:
>> >>
>> >> Highway=service
>> >> Service= Pipestem
>> >>
>> >> Would be interested in knowing your thoughts.
>> >>
>> >> regards,
>> >>
>> >> Sebastian
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> Talk-au mailing list
>> >> Talk-au at openstreetmap.org
>> >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>> > 
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Talk-au mailing list
>> > Talk-au at openstreetmap.org
>> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Talk-au mailing list
>> Talk-au at openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Talk-au mailing list
>> Talk-au at openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>> _______________________________________________
>> Talk-au mailing list
>> Talk-au at openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-au mailing list
> Talk-au at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/attachments/20220316/e2263876/attachment-0001.htm>