[Talk-us-massachusetts] Mass Pike Toll Tagging

[Brian M. Sperlongano]

I'm not sure what this "Mass Pike" is that you guys are talking about.  Do
you mean the Massachusetts Turnpike?

/ducks

On Tue, Aug 2, 2022 at 1:46 PM Greg Troxel <gdt at lexort.com> wrote:

>
> "Peter Cooper Jr. via Talk-us-massachusetts"
> <talk-us-massachusetts at openstreetmap.org> writes:
>
> > Or am I overcomplicating things since "the Mass Pike is a toll road"
> > is the historic mindset of many people, including myself, and people
> > who want to tell their routing engine to avoid tolls are probably
> > trying to avoid going on the Pike at all even for short segments that
> > don't actually have a toll? (I know, for instance, that my wife will
> > tell our GPS that for that reason.)
>
> A complicated and difficult question.   As I see it, two separate
> issues:
>
>   There is often a lot of wikifiddilng and debates about exactly how to
>   tag sometimes seems disconnected from "what are we intending to convey
>   and how do data consumers use this"?
>
>   What are the use cases for toll tagging?  I can see:
>     - for a proposed route, compute the toll, so that
>         * routes can be chosen to "avoid toll road"
>         * some blend of time/distance/toll can be minimized
>     - renders can display "is this a toll road"
>   In an ideal world, the tagging community and wiki pages might have
>   this discussion, but in my experience they do not.
>
> There is a general principle about roads in terms of trunk/primary that
> we don't flip back and forth every 100m.  If something isn't trunk for
> several km, and is primary before/after, it stays primary.   Toll
> tagging kind of feels like this, and I'd for most of the time want to
> err on the side of broad brush the whole thing as toll.
>
> As for what people want, I'd say "avoid toll" means avoiding tolls, and
> does not mean "avoid interstates (motorways)", for which there is or
> should be a separate checkbox.  Does your device/program allow that?
>
> I haven't really dug in, but I would be inclined to say (take this very
> loosely!):
>
>   - actual toll gantries should have tags
>
>   - the roads leaving I-9 probably should not be marked toll, even if
>     you can't get there without having tolled before, but maybe that's
>     off and they should remain toll until the next way to get onto
>     them.  Maybe that's the I-84 case.
>
>   - I completely see your point about sections that aren't tolled where
>     you can legally/reasonably get on and off.  Those probably should
>     not be marked toll.  This includes the on-ramp where you have a
>     choice.
>
>   - I observe that routers that avoid toll have to make a route with no
>     toll.
>
>   - It feels really hacky to just tag a way 100m before and after each
>     gantry and not the rest.  It will work for routers and avoid toll,
>     but it is not a correct representation of the world.
>
>   - I think that the fact that a road is maintained by a "toll
>     authority" is not relevant.  In fact, I am pretty sure that's no
>     longer the case and it's just MassDOT, but even if it were, that's
>     not what makes something a toll road -- it's that you have to pay.
>
>
> I wasn't sure what I thought when I started, but I've come around to
> what I think is your view that "a way is tagged toll if it is necessary
> to pay a toll to drive on it (in a lawful and reasonable manner)".   And
> I'm ok with that magic section being not yellow on maps -- because that
> is in fact how the world is.
>
> I am really curious to hear what other people think!
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-us-massachusetts mailing list
> Talk-us-massachusetts at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us-massachusetts
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us-massachusetts/attachments/20220802/3d69b540/attachment-0001.htm>