[Talk-GB] 'C' class roads references.

Philip Barnes phil at trigpoint.me.uk
Sat Aug 4 06:01:13 UTC 2018



On 4 August 2018 04:03:13 CEST, "WebMaster at Killyfole.org.uk" <webmaster at killyfole.org.uk> wrote:
>I don't understand the logic of doing this?
>
>Surely we map for what is there on the ground, not how it renders?  If
>a road 
>has a reference number or a name, surely it is up to the render if it
>should 
>show that information or not, not how we tag it in the database?

But for a render to know if it is a signed reference we need to tell the renderer that and the way we do that is to use a different tag. 

The renderer cannot know not to render refs on C roads in the UK, remember osm is an international database. 

Telling a driver to turn left onto the C666 is confusing if there is no sign to back up that instruction. 

C references are only used by local authorities, whilst it is possible to find them I have never seen them in an OSM compatible form. They are certainly not used by local people, other than a few people interested in such things. Rather like public right of way references. 

If you want to produce a render to display these admin references then you are welcome to do so. 

Public right of way references, along with stiles and kissing gates, are for example rendered on Andy Townsend's specialist walking map. 

Phil (trigpoint) 



>
>In my particular area I have people "helicopting in" to remove the C
>and U 
>numbers off the roads, just because they don't like the way it renders!
> But 
>the fact is that none of the rural roads have signs giving the name, so
>just 
>because my local council can't agree on putting up signs on the road I
>live 
>on, it shouldn't have a name on OSM?
>
>Again in my area this is the reason OpenStreetMap is gaining a lot of
>ground 
>compared to other maps, because it shows the road names and reference
>numbers 
>which are useful for locals and people trying to find their way around.
> For 
>example, the local media will give a list of road names and reference
>numbers 
>during times of flood to indicate what roads locals should avoid. 
>There are 
>no other comparable maps which show this information, only OSM and a
>lot of 
>people now use OSM because of that.
>
>Just because a local authority doesn't signpost something, does not
>mean it 
>doesn't exist or isn't useful to local people.
>
>Just my two cents on the this, and I would very strongly object to this
>being 
>carried out in County Fermanagh.
>
>KDDA
>
>
>
>
>On Saturday, 4 August 2018 00:47:20 IST Dave F wrote:
>> Hi
>> 
>> After many discussions over the years about the referencing of 'C'
>class
>> roads there appeared to be a general consensus to keep them in the
>> database but provide a unique tag to allow them not to be rendered.
>> 
>> This is a list of the discussions (there maybe others):
>>
>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2011-May/011632.html
>>
>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2013-March/014555.html
>>
>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2013-April/014788.html
>>
>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2014-August/016392.html
>>
>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2015-May/017390.html
>>
>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2015-May/017414.html
>> 
>> However this task was never undertaken. I decided to grab the bull by
>> the horns.
>> 
>> I used variations of this Overpass query within JOSM to find the
>> numerous 'C' refs keys (listed below) tagged to the different road
>> classification.
>> I uploaded in batches split by geography &/or tag values to make it
>> easier for me to verify
>> I used detailed changeset descriptions to make it easier to rectify
>if
>> needed. If you spot any errors please let me know.
>> 
>> [maxsize:2073741824];
>> area(id:3600058447,3600058437,3600058446); // England, Wales,
>Scotland
>> //[bbox:{{bbox}}];
>>    way[highway=*highway classification"][~ref~"^C[0-9]{1,4}$"]
>(area);
>> //out tags;
>> //out center;
>> (._;>;); out meta;
>> 
>> *Various keys used for 'C' refs:
>> (listed most popular down)
>> * ref
>> official_ref
>> admin_ref
>> admin:ref
>> wcc_ref
>> highway_ref
>> designation
>> offical_ref
>> int_ref
>> unsigned_ref
>> reference
>> local_ref
>> 
>> *Highway classes with 'C' refs:*
>> **(listed most popular down)**
>> tertiary (+_link)
>> unclassified
>> trunk (+_link)
>> residential (error?)
>> service (error?)
>> pedestrian (error? Roads converted to pedestrian, but still
>classified?)
>> track (error/prow_ref?)
>> secondary (+_link)
>> primary
>> 
>> I've amended them to *'highway_authority_ref*'. It was discussed in
>the
>> May '15 thread where it was felt official_ref or admin_ref wasn't
>> specific enough. Feel free to discuss here if you have strong
>objections
>> to it. If there's a consensus to change it's quite easy now they're
>all
>> under a single tag.
>> 
>> Note I didn't include Northern Ireland as I'm unsure whether they're
>> signed on the ground or not. Is anyone able to verify?
>> 
>> These are the trunk, primary & secondary roads which previously
>either
>> had a ref or highway_authority_ref:
>> http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/AM7
>> 
>> Similarly these are the pedestrian, service, residential & track
>> http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/AM8
>> 
>> These still have 'ref' tags: proposed, abandoned, construction, path,
>> footway & cycleway; possibly copy paste errors or should be
>prow_ref?:
>> http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/AMc
>> 
>> Please amend if you have local knowledge & believe any of the above
>are
>> an error.
>> 
>> Cheers
>> DaveF
>
>
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Talk-GB mailing list
>Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org
>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.



More information about the Talk-GB mailing list