[talk-ph] Tagging bridges and tunnels

Pierre Béland pierzenh at yahoo.fr
Thu Feb 19 03:12:46 UTC 2015

Hi Ronny,
for the refs that are not implemented yet (ie no signs on the road), you could convert to ref:phThis way, it would keep the reference and it would be easy later to convert back. 

On the map, both the ref and the road name are showed. I am not sure that the name will be showed by the routing applications if you remove the ref. You will see the result if you look at areas where there is no ref.
About the roundabout in the calculator, we see in this link that small segments with no names are reported as unamed.  
You could try to discuss on the osm main list about this reporting how this new routing feature could be enhanced.

      De : Ronny Ager-Wick <ronny at ager-wick.com>
 À : Pierre Béland <pierzenh at yahoo.fr>; Eugene Alvin Villar <seav80 at gmail.com> 
Cc : OSM-PH <talk-ph at openstreetmap.org> 
 Envoyé le : Mercredi 18 février 2015 22h01
 Objet : Re: [talk-ph] Tagging bridges and tunnels
 Hi, Pierre,
 Thanks for the reply. It seems to me that when a road has a ref tag, the itinerary calculator generally ignores street names, including the one given to the Abacan Bridge. This may make sense in Europe and the US, but here it's actually quite confusing.
 The ref (R-9 fo MacArthur Highway) is generally not used outside of the mapping community, and hardly within I believe. If I ask 500 random people on the street in Angeles City where R-9 or R-8 is, I doubt a single one would know. Furthermore, I can't remember seeing a single sign along a road stating the ref. The ideal displayed name for this road would be "MacArthur Highway" - that's what everyone calls it. Same for R-9, which is known as "NLEX", or simply "the expressway". Is there a way to make that happen, but still not tag for display purposes? Could we simply remove the ref tag entirely, maybe renaming it to "future_ref" or something awaiting the local government actually putting up signs so that people are aware of it (likely to take decades)? If we're supposed to map reality, the ref tag, at least outside of Metro Manila, does not reflect it at the moment.
 Also, the itinerary calculator unfortunately doesn't seem to handle roundabouts very well. Or are they incorrectly tagged? If I was to give that itinerary description to someone, I am sure they would get lost, as I can hardly think of a more complicated way to describe an essentially straight piece of road. Knowing I might  have been tagging incorrectly in this area myself, is there any way we could tag this differently to improve the routing?
 Ideally this stretch would be described as:
 Follow MacArthur Highway
 Turn slight right onto Abacan Bridge
 Turn slight left onto MacArthur Highway (or better, "Take 3rd exit in the roundabout onto MacArthur Highway", but this may be hard if the routing software doesn't know it's a roundabout...)
 Reach destination.
 On 2015-02-19 09:33, Pierre Béland wrote:

  Hi Ronny, 
  I thought of using the new itinary calculation crossing the  Abacan bridge. I can see from the map in this area that in Philippines, like elsewhere, ref tag is used for roads (here ref=R-9). See the link for the itinary http://www.openstreetmap.org/directions?engine=osrm_car&route=15.1682%2C120.5893%3B15.1426%2C120.5962#map=15/15.1554/120.5929 
  With OSRM, it does show the ref-R-9 but do not report bridge crossing. With Mapquest, there is even less info. 
  I wonder if OSMAnd on Android or any other road calculation software would report bridge crossing. 
      De : Ronny Ager-Wick <ronny at ager-wick.com>
 À : Eugene Alvin Villar <seav80 at gmail.com>; Pierre Béland <pierzenh at yahoo.fr> 
 Cc : OSM-PH <talk-ph at openstreetmap.org> 
 Envoyé le : Mercredi 18 février 2015 20h18
 Objet : Re: [talk-ph] Tagging bridges and tunnels
   This is a good point Eugene, and in fact the bridge names are very good landmarks, given that there are not many other signs on the roads in the Philippines, especially in rural areas. Another thing to take into consideration is that many bridges gain their name from the river they cross over, so there may be many bridges with the same name. They are definitely not tagged consistently at the moment, for example:
 If I remember correctly, they are both named Abacan Bridge, but only one of them has that name on the map, and incidentally the one with a different road name on each side does not.
 Do you know if common routing software will pick up the bridge:name=* tag?
 Yes, I know we're not supposed to tag based on what current software will pick up, but it is interesting to know, given that bridges are such great landmarks.
 It would be great with a published suggested standard that fits the Philippine conditions.
 On 2015-02-19 08:08, Eugene Alvin Villar wrote:
    Hi Pierre,
  Most bridges here in the Philippines have names no matter how small. You can usually spot their name on the guard rail or on a small sign just before the bridge. These names are almost always accompanied by the maximum  load the bridge can handle (which is tagged using maxweight=*) and sometimes with the distance from the island's zero-kilometer marker (I have no idea how to tag these. Maybe distance=*?).
  Some examples:
 On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 1:59 AM, Pierre Béland <pierzenh at yahoo.fr> wrote:
  I expect that only the major bridges have name. And we generally refer to these by their name  and not the road reference. Unless you have particularities in Philippines. Example Golden Gate Bridge in San Francisco bay. OpenStreetMap | ‪Golden Gate Bridge‬ (‪52477381‬)
      De : Eugene Alvin Villar <seav80 at gmail.com>
 À : Ervin Malicdem <schadow1 at gmail.com> 
 Cc : OSM-PH <talk-ph at openstreetmap.org> 
 Envoyé le : Mercredi 18 février 2015 12h35
 Objet : Re: [talk-ph] Tagging bridges and tunnels
      Hi Ervin,
  Option 1 is what I do.
  Take note that if we have a way with  highway=something and bridge=yes, then the object is primarily a  highway/road and the bridge is only an aspect or property of the highway/road segment. Therefore, the name=*  tag should be the name of the highway/road. And then put the name of the bridge on the bridge:name=* tag.
  Besides, it will be very weird to have a long  highway with unconnected names just because there are bridges along the  highway.
 The only time I would put the name of the bridge on  the name=* tag is if the roads from both ends of the bridge have different  names. For example, the bridge formerly called Del  Pan in Manila: www.openstreetmap.org/way/4304674
 On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 5:34 PM, Ervin Malicdem <schadow1 at gmail.com> wrote:
       Query regarding tagging  bridges.
  What is the appropriate  way of tagging bridges?
  Option1: Use the name of  the road, and place the name of the bridge  under bridge:name or  the name of the tunnel under  tunnel:name
  Option2: Use the name of the  bridge/tunnel, omit the road name
       Ervin M.
 Schadow1 Expeditions - A Filipino must not be a  stranger to his own motherland.  http://www.s1expeditions.com             
 talk-ph mailing list
 talk-ph at openstreetmap.org
 talk-ph mailing list
 talk-ph at openstreetmap.org
talk-ph mailing list
talk-ph at openstreetmap.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ph/attachments/20150219/a29cd9bf/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the talk-ph mailing list