[OSM-np] Road standards

Thu Sep 6 02:55:25 BST 2012

Just to finish up the conversation, looks like there is agreement on gallis
being highway=footway and galli=yes. As Sakar mentioned in another email,
we might write a custom OSM renderer for Nepal at some point that
incorporates this information. For now, it will just remain in the
database, and appear just as a footway.

I've updated http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Nepal:Roads and added the
hints that "Marga" usually implies residential road, "Galli" in a name
implies a Galli, and "Sadak" (often) implies secondary road.

On Sat, Aug 25, 2012 at 11:16 AM, Prabhas Pokharel <
prabhas.pokharel at gmail.com> wrote:

> And final thought.... we might be able to piggy back our
> primary/secondary/residential/service classifications using the road names.
> Road names end in things like (here are the ones I observed): sadak, marga,
> galli + (an outshoot of a marga, like the 660/x Araniko Marga example I
> gave)
>
> Likely, Sadak should be either a primary or a secondary road; marga should
> be residential, and galli should be service or pedestrian.
>
> On Sat, Aug 25, 2012 at 10:07 AM, Prabhas Pokharel <
> prabhas.pokharel at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I'm happy with the proposition against a living_street: makes things
>> simple + pedestrian is the right tag for durbar squares, and by analogy it
>> makes sense.
>>
>> Had a question about gallis though (some of which are quite 'long' and
>> provide almost through access to motorcycles) that I have put in the "Points
>> of discussions<http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Nepal:Roads#Points_of_discussion>"
>> of the talk page, and copied below:
>>
>>
>>    - From this description, gallis can either be highway=service or
>>    highway=pedestrian. Some gallis are used for through access and are almost
>>    residential "roads" for motorcycles, others are not. Should we use
>>    highway=service for the former and highway=pedestrian for the latter?
>>
>>
>>    - lanes = 1: in the US context, lanes = 1 means one lane per
>>    direction (unless it is a one-way road). Our definition is counting lanes
>>    in both directions. Is this consistent with the European standards (ie, on
>>    what most routing apps with think)?
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Aug 24, 2012 at 3:01 PM, bibekshrestha at gmail.com <
>> bibekshrestha at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Some of the fantastic roads of Khokana, if you have been in one of these
>>> you know you've been just put into a different century.
>>> http://www.trektrips.net/information/226/khokana.html
>>>
>>> Thoughts on the two roads? I'd suggest we go with highway=residential
>>> for these too.
>>> I mention these just to make it clear that we can avoid living_street.
>>>
>>> Argument for highway=residential: These roads are primarily there
>>> to provide access to houses.
>>> A template like highway=residential; motorcycle=yes; bicycle=yes;
>>> lanes=1; motorcar=yes/no depending upon if that can pass through say a
>>> maruti can sufficiently tag these streets for routing purposes.
>>>
>>>  Comments?
>>> --
>>> 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 Fri, Aug 24, 2012 at 8:41 PM, bibekshrestha at gmail.com <
>>> bibekshrestha at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Sakar,
>>>>
>>>> IMO, highway=pedestrian describes the roads in and around Ason,
>>>> Patan-KTM-Bhaktapur durbar square more precisely than highway=living_street.
>>>>
>>>> Both have limitations to vehicular movement. In pedestrian streets, it
>>>> is because these streets are used specially by people to move, in around
>>>> crowded market area. The vehicular movement is caused either by
>>>> restrictions imposed, may be vehicles are allowed at certain times only,
>>>> and that too for offloading goods. You can check out more description at
>>>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dpedestrian
>>>>
>>>> The restrictions in living_street are not just because of possible
>>>> people walking, but because these area allows for instance kids to play on
>>>> the streets, people could walk here more freely because they know the
>>>> streets are sparsely used by cars. IMO it means cars are free to take these
>>>> streets but they have to be extra attentive.
>>>>
>>>> I cannot think of any examples for living_street in Nepal to be honest.
>>>> Most of them could be categorized into pedestrians. May be the quiet
>>>> streets around Bungamati, Khokana...
>>>>
>>>> I know there is no clear cut difference here, for simplicity I would
>>>> propose we use pedestrian if vehicular movement is highly constrained by
>>>> cars.
>>>> Otherwise it is a residential road. Let's completely avoid
>>>> living_street. Makes live much more simpler.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers
>>>> --
>>>> 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 Fri, Aug 24, 2012 at 8:06 PM, Sakar Pudasaini <sakar at galligalli.org>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Simple is good but not having a separate classification the streets
>>>>> around Ason and like areas seems like a step too far. They are in
>>>>> a conceptual category other than "residential"... they are crowded
>>>>> with pedestrians, with road side vendors etc who actually have priority
>>>>> over cars. From a purely practical perspective I'd want routing tools to
>>>>> avoid those kinds of streets... I mean you could push through those areas
>>>>> with a car, I've seen it done, but that does not make it a good idea.
>>>>>
>>>>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Living_street says "Routing and
>>>>> navigation software *might* try to avoid such areas when navigating
>>>>> cars." So if we going to try and fit our requirements to western
>>>>> categories, this might be the best one we have. Unless of course there is
>>>>> an additional attribute that achieves the same effect.
>>>>>
>>>>> -s
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 7:00 AM, Rajeev Amatya <rajeevamatya at gmail.com
>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi guys,
>>>>>> Bibek and I worked on the road standards. We want to finalize it by
>>>>>> Friday. It would be a nice idea to make it as simple as possible, while
>>>>>> covering most of the common roads of Kathmandu and Nepal. We also talked to
>>>>>> OSMers in Munich and got some good feedbacks from them. Living Street is a
>>>>>> very European concept and probably does not apply to Nepal. Might be a good
>>>>>> idea to not use it at all. Also, most of the routing apps are based upon
>>>>>> European roads, so it would be a good idea to try to comply as much as
>>>>>> possible so that we use them with minimum code change.
>>>>>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Nepal:Roads#Local_Roads
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Please have a look and start a discussion if you don't agree. But
>>>>>> let's get it done quickly. Thanks a lot.
>>>>>> Rajeev
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> 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
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Prabhas Pokharel
> http://twitter.com/prabhasp
> US mobile: +1 347 948 7654
> skype/facebook/whatever: prabhasp
>
>

-- 
Prabhas Pokharel
http://twitter.com/prabhasp
US mobile: +1 347 948 7654
skype/facebook/whatever: prabhasp
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-np/attachments/20120905/56f8cdc0/attachment-0001.html>