[OSM-np] Classification of Roads in Nepal

Wed Jul 4 16:42:29 BST 2012

Rajeev,

It makes perfect sense. And it has simplicity on its side which is
generally a winner in my book.

In this case though I do worry the system proposed is conflating too much
into a single value. At some point this stuff have to rendered visually and
for all 2 lane roads to look the same might not be so good. As for the
upkeep problem, that is going to be a pain in the ass in a fast urbanizing
city like Ktm anyway.

Prabhas,

You attempt to a description for Type A1 and I'll attempt to classify them
into the final classifications :-) Deal?

-S

On Mon, Jul 2, 2012 at 11:26 PM, Rajeev Amatya <rajeevamatya at gmail.com>wrote:

> Hi guys,
>
> Pardon me if I do not make any sense.
>
> Whether a street is paved or not will change over time and we may not be
> able to update the info regularly. If possible, we should only use tag for
> that.
>
> I would rather categorize the roads by lanes and go with particular
> attributes. Naming could be done accordingly.
>
> The tags in italics are not necessary.
>
> How about:
>
> For urban roads,
> categories:
> 1. Multi-lane road,* tag footpath, tag traffic lights??* (eg. baneshwor
> to maitighar)
> 2. Two lane road, tag footpath * tag traffic lights??* (eg. thapathali
> area?)
> 3. Two lane road, tag no_footpath,  tag traffic lights?? (eg. airport to
> sinamangal)
>
> 4. One lane road, access two cars, one or two way tag
> 5. One lane road, access one car, one or two way tag
>
> 6. No lane road,* access bike/bicycle*, tag restricted (eg. durbar
> square, shankhamool bridge)
> 7. No lane road, *access bike/bicycle*, tag crowded (eg. ason)
> 8. No lane road, *access bike/bicycle*, tag narrow (gallis)
>
> rajeev
>
>
> On Mon, Jul 2, 2012 at 5:44 PM, Sakar Pudasaini <sakar at galligalli.org>wrote:
>
>> For the moment I say we favor proliferation. And then we go through a
>> round of culling. So I've added a Type A1 and Type C1 to accommodate your
>> suggestions. Perhaps you could type out your thoughts more "formally" to
>> give us a working definition on the A's since that is unclear to me.
>>
>> Type A: Roads that connect major cities and designed to lead traffic out
>> of, into or around a town. These streets are relative broad and though they
>> maybe potholed occasionally, regular resources are committed to keep them
>> in good shape.
>>
>> Type A1:
>>
>> Type B: Roads with in the city that deal with (or are capable of dealing
>> with) significant volumes of traffic. These roads are designed for motor
>> vehicles AND regular resources are committed to their upkeep. I'm thinking
>> Ram Shah Path, the gausala road running from Chabil Chowk to Baneshwor
>> Chowk, Pasupati Sadak (running from Kamalpokhari towards the airport)
>>
>> Type C: Roads with in the city that are designed for Motor Vehicles BUT
>> do not see regular upkeep. There are side streets that accommodate 2 way
>> traffic and might have been pitched at some point but now are maybe half
>> pitched at the best. These often tend to be connectors between two Type B
>> roads.
>>
>> Type C1: Like a Type C but an only accommodate one car at a time in
>> either direction (though the road itself might be a two way)
>>
>> Type D: Unpaved roads intended for cars.
>>
>> Type E: unpaved or paved galli's that will not fit cars but motorcycles
>> and cycles can go through them
>>
>> Type F: roads in heavily populated areas that could fit cars but where
>> street vendors and pedestrians hold sway e.g. Ason. This is the
>> "living_street" I think.
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Jul 2, 2012 at 8:28 PM, Prabhas Pokharel <
>> prabhas.pokharel at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Sakar, I like that. Lets go with it a bit.
>>>
>>> What about the difference Bibek and I were chatting about... roads which
>>> are otherwise Type C, but two cars side by side could not fit on them. Lots
>>> of roads in the Purano Baneshwor / Gaushala area, in Patan area, etc. Do
>>> you think that is worth separating out?
>>>
>>> Finally, on the type A side, is there a difference between the new
>>> Koteshwor highway, and type A (I think ring road at one end of this and
>>> Mahendra Highway on the other)? I could go either way on this, probably
>>> merging them into the
>>>
>>>
>>> On Monday, July 2, 2012, Sakar Pudasaini wrote:
>>>
>>>> Yeah. Super west centric... think I've seen a total of 1 road sign in
>>>> the last month. Also the idea of a cycle path, so designated by law is
>>>> pretty much laughable. I have not tried it but I imagine I could take a
>>>> damn horse anywhere I really pleased... ride it all the way to china down
>>>> the highway :-)
>>>>
>>>> May I make a suggestion. How about we flip the script and first try to
>>>> agree on the types of roads we think exist in Nepal, then decide what is
>>>> the appropriate tagging for it. It maybe that two of our types go into the
>>>> same tag, or it may be that a tag that exists is irrelevant for Nepal etc.
>>>> Also I agree with Prabhas' assessment but I do think we should try to norm
>>>> within at least the rest of the subcontinent, don't imagine their
>>>> situations is that different from ours. And norms are nice when they can
>>>> be established.
>>>>
>>>> Here is my attempt at a few, this is going to be Kathmandu-centric
>>>> since I have not had a chance to explore outside the valley for a while:
>>>>
>>>> 1. Type A: Roads that connect major cities and designed to lead traffic
>>>> out of, into or around a town. These streets are relative broad and though
>>>> they maybe potholed occasionally, regular resources are committed to keep
>>>> them in good shape. E.g. Arniko highway, ring road
>>>>
>>>> 2. Type B: Roads with in the city that deal with (or are capable of
>>>> dealing with) significant volumes of traffic. These roads are designed for
>>>> motor vehicles AND regular resources are committed to their upkeep. I'm
>>>> thinking Ram Shah Path, the gausala road running from Chabil Chowk to
>>>> Baneshwor Chowk, Pasupati Sadak (running from Kamalpokhari towards the
>>>> airport)
>>>>
>>>> 3. Type C: Roads with in the city that are designed for Motor Vehicles
>>>> BUT do not see regular upkeep. There are side streets that accommodate 2
>>>> way traffic and might have been pitched at some point but now are maybe
>>>> half pitched at the best. These often tend to be connectors between two
>>>> Type B roads.
>>>>
>>>> 4. Type D: Unpaved roads intended for cars.
>>>>
>>>> 5. Type E: unpaved or paved galli's that will not fit cars but
>>>> motorcycles and cycles can go through them
>>>>
>>>> 6. Type F: roads in heavily populated areas that could fit cars but
>>>> where street vendors and pedestrians hold sway e.g. Ason. This is the
>>>> "living_street" I think.
>>>>
>>>> I struggled with B and C. They could very well be the same thing, but
>>>> as someone who rides a motorbike around town they feel very different.
>>>>
>>>> -Sakar
>>>>
>>>> On Sun, Jul 1, 2012 at 7:50 AM, Prabhas Pokharel <
>>>> prabhas.pokharel at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hmm, not sure that I have more clarity in my head of how to tag things
>>>>> now. There are also highway=service and highway=path that we could pair
>>>>> with motorcycle=yes.
>>>>>
>>>>> In general, I think the rules that are built are very western centric,
>>>>> as you can see in the images in the path controversy (
>>>>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Path_controversy). So the
>>>>> guidelines we build for ourselves should be a result of creative
>>>>> interpretation of norms in place in other places of the world rather than
>>>>> trying to find the exact meaning based on pictures that one is very
>>>>> unlikely to see in Nepal.
>>>>>
>>>>> --p
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Saturday, June 30, 2012, bibekshrestha at gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> For living_street vs residential road, the first paragraph here
>>>>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dresidential kind of
>>>>> explains the difference. Atleast the image on the right side does not look
>>>>> like a living_street.
>>>>> --
>>>>> Bibek Shrestha
>>>>> bibekshrestha at gmail dot com
>>>>> Twitter: http://twitter.com/bibstha
>>>>> "You mustn't be afraid to dream a little bigger, darling.", Eames to
>>>>> Arthur, Inception 2010
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 4:55 PM, bibekshrestha at gmail.com <
>>>>> bibekshrestha at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> The following references try to clarify the confusion, but only to
>>>>> some extent.
>>>>>
>>>>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Tag:highway%3Dpedestrian#footway_vs_pedestrian
>>>>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Path_controversy
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Bibek Shrestha
>>>>> bibekshrestha at gmail dot com
>>>>> Twitter: http://twitter.com/bibstha
>>>>> "You mustn't be afraid to dream a little bigger, darling.", Eames to
>>>>> Arthur, Inception 2010
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 4:54 PM, bibekshrestha at gmail.com <
>>>>> bibekshrestha at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Bibek Shrestha
>>>>> bibekshrestha at gmail dot com
>>>>> Twitter: http://twitter.com/bibstha
>>>>> "You mustn't be afraid to dream a little bigger, darling.", Eames to
>>>>> Arthur, Inception 2010
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 8:45 AM, Prabhas Pokharel <
>>>>> prabhas.pokharel at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Bibek, thanks for making a first draft of this important document. One
>>>>> minor suggestion: should we think of something that is very similar to
>>>>> highway=pedestrian, but streets that are accessible to motorcycles? As we
>>>>> know, there are a lot of places like this in Kathmandu, does dual tagging of
>>>>> highway=pedestrian and motorcyle=yes make sense?
>>>>>
>>>>> I think we agree on motorcycle=yes on this but I'm not too sure
>>>>> whether we use highway=footway or highway=pedestrian. (Which Sakar
>>>>> mentioned in his reply).
>>>>>
>>>>> I would personally prefer highway=pedestrian for the following
>>>>> criteria.
>>>>> a. if the road is as wide enough as a normal road but people use it
>>>>> only for walking (usually city centers, squares, etc),
>>>>>
>>>>> highway=footpath
>>>>> b. The narrow gallis and shortcuts which cannot have a car (sth bigger
>>>>> than a maruti may be because maruti usually can squeeze in any kind of
>>>>> road) move through it. Like the gallis in Bhaktapur or Kathmandu.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The trickiest part when tagging that I come across is deciding between
>>>>> highway=residential and highway=living_street Its usually very diffi
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>
>>>>> Talk-np mailing list
>>>>> Talk-np at openstreetmap.org
>>>>> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-np
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Prabhas Pokharel
>>> http://twitter.com/prabhasp
>>> US mobile: +1 347 948 7654
>>> skype/facebook/whatever: prabhasp
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Talk-np mailing list
>>> Talk-np at openstreetmap.org
>>> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-np
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Talk-np mailing list
>> Talk-np at openstreetmap.org
>> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-np
>>
>>
>
>
> --
>
> Rajeev Amatya
>
> Mobile: +41 78 806 64 95 (CH)  /  +49 1578 7608487 (DE)
> Email:   rajeev.amatya at student.unisg.ch / rajeevamatya at gmail.com
>
> University of St. Gallen
> Master of Arts in Strategy and International Management (SIM)
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-np mailing list
> Talk-np at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-np
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-np/attachments/20120704/53735aec/attachment-0001.html>