[talk-ph] changes of road types

maning sambale emmanuel.sambale at gmail.com
Sat Jan 23 04:10:43 GMT 2010


Let me just remind that whatever comes up as a consensus please add
them in the wiki:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Philippines/Mapping_conventions

Excellent discussion btw.
On Sat, Jan 23, 2010 at 6:41 AM, Ray <rayosm1234 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
>> Reviewing the map reveals that many places roads seems to have too high
>> of a classification, misleading people to use roads that are not meant
>> for a lot of traffic.
>>
>>  From an overall perspective the classification of roads should be used
>> to guide people which roads to prefer.
>
> +1
> I'm also in favor of tagging the roads after their properties and how
> good you can travel on them. Eugine explained it very well.
>
> When i can recognize a better type on the images than "road" i'll change
> it for nearly the same reasons Ian pointed out.
>
> For residential vs. unclassified: a road (or part of) which doesn't have
> [a couple of] houses is IMHO unclassified. Maybe you can describe
> residential as an special form of unclassified (i.g. not tertiary).
> There are houses around so expect slow driving cos of parking cars and
> people walking around.
>
> When someone traces a new road from images and don't know what kind of
> road it is he should follow the legal classification. Later someone with
> local knowledge can retag the road / split it up. On the satellite
> images you can also see how much houses are around, so residential
> should be easy.
>
>> Assuming that all motorway, trunk, primary, secondary and tertiary roads
>> have been mapped long ago, newbies should only be concerned with the
>> lower classes of roads.
>>
>> I suggest the out come of this discussion will be a series of photos of
>> typical roads and how to tag them.
>>
>> I have started a document already for this purpose so this discussion is
>> very welcome :-)
>>
>> http://idisk.mac.com/michael.riber//Public/osmph/Road Types 0.0.doc
>
> A guide with pictures is a great idea. Looking at the list, i would use
> footway for roads / tracks to narrow for cars. Or highway=path and foot
> / bicycle = yes if this matters.
> Pedestrian is "For town centres and civic areas, where wide expanses of
> hard surface are provided for pedestrians to walk (often between
> shops)." (Wiki)
>
> As maning said, we need to get more use of track and tracktype. Can you
> include this in your document?
>
> I suggest also that we make use of surface and lane keys.
> surface=paved/unpaved/compacted will be important for rural roads and
> navigation.
>
> Ray
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> talk-ph mailing list
> talk-ph at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph
>



-- 
cheers,
maning
------------------------------------------------------
"Freedom is still the most radical idea of all" -N.Branden
wiki: http://esambale.wikispaces.com/
blog: http://epsg4253.wordpress.com/
------------------------------------------------------




More information about the talk-ph mailing list