[Talk-in] National Highway relations are unacceptably huuuuge!

Amaroussi (OpenStreetMap) mapper at minoa.li
Sun Jul 24 17:41:47 UTC 2016


Hi,

Apologies if I have not seen to this earlier, but if measurements from OSM are crucial, then what about a route_master structure for the NHs and SHs (according to the guidance at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:route#Members)?

It would allow each direction to have its own relation and then we can easily get the average distance from the two. It just seems odd that only one side is measured.

— Amaroussi.

> On 24 Jul 2016, at 17:48, Naveen Francis <naveenpf at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi 
> 
> Statewise NH relations are created for more accurate NH lengths. 
> It is used is wikipedia directly. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_National_Highways_in_India_by_State#Andhra_Pradesh <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_National_Highways_in_India_by_State#Andhra_Pradesh>, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roads_in_Kerala#National_Highways <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roads_in_Kerala#National_Highways>)
> Appreciate if it is not changed, without any good proposals. 
> Lot of work has gone behind that. 
> Every month new highway notifications from govt gazatte are mapped. 
> Errors in NH are documented here. 
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:India:National_Highways_(statewise) <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:India:National_Highways_(statewise)>
> 
> Thanks, 
> naveenpf 
> 
> 
> On 24 July 2016 at 17:05, Amaroussi (OpenStreetMap) <mapper at minoa.li <mailto:mapper at minoa.li>> wrote:
> It appears there was an oversight in one of changesets for the NH44 relations, where I should have checked that the members were still in the original NH44 relation. The error occurred when I was ordering the NH44 relation.
> 
>> On 24 Jul 2016, at 11:27, I Chengappa <imchengappa at gmail.com <mailto:imchengappa at gmail.com>> wrote:
>> 
>> Heinz_V has made relevant comments in a forum post at http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=17851&p=3 <http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=17851&p=3>. I've not been paying attention to most road / route relations, but I understand that there has been a coherent mapping of national highways in India, mostly due to him, which has now been broken. As the discussion has primarily been there so far, I suggest that it should continue there. 
>> 
>> This discussion, between two users over one day and in a separate forum from that discussion, does not constitute general acceptance, even by default. Hence there is an argument for reverting the changes. 
>> 
>> On 21 July 2016 at 16:25, Arun Ganesh <arun.planemad at gmail.com <mailto:arun.planemad at gmail.com>> wrote:
>> This is looking good to me. It would be great to have a diary post on tools/workflow to do this. Have always found handling and modifying these relations painful.
>> 
>> On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 7:21 PM, Amaroussi (OpenStreetMap) <mapper at minoa.li <mailto:mapper at minoa.li>> wrote:
>> Hi,
>> 
>> I have set up NH765 as a prototype for the reformed relations - NH765 is a small route where it should be easy to fine tune the idea before full-scale conversion.
>> 
>> The base route (https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/3871741 <https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/3871741>) would only contain sub-relations with for each State that it passes through with appropriate role names (as the E-route system already does).
>> 
>> The sub-relations, for Telangana (https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/5826946 <https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/5826946>) and Andhra Pradesh (https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/5826980 <https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/5826980>) in our case, would contain appropriately ordered ways, with the main route on top and links (slip roads) at the bottom.
>> 
>> I envisage that one relation for each state should be sufficient for the time being.
>> 
>> — Amaroussi.
>> _______________________________________________
>> Talk-in mailing list
>> Talk-in at openstreetmap.org <mailto:Talk-in at openstreetmap.org>
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in <https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in>
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> Arun Ganesh
>> @planemad
>>  <http://j.mp/ArunGanesh>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Talk-in mailing list
>> Talk-in at openstreetmap.org <mailto:Talk-in at openstreetmap.org>
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in <https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in>
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Talk-in mailing list
>> Talk-in at openstreetmap.org <mailto:Talk-in at openstreetmap.org>
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in <https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in>
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-in mailing list
> Talk-in at openstreetmap.org <mailto:Talk-in at openstreetmap.org>
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in <https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in>
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-in mailing list
> Talk-in at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-in/attachments/20160724/74c95c2b/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Talk-in mailing list