[Talk-us] Talk-us Digest, Vol 32, Issue 32
Brian Fischer
bfischer at houstoneng.com
Thu Jul 29 16:57:30 BST 2010
Hi All,
Just thought I would throw my 2cents in. I am pretty new to OSM and have just recently started editing some roads in MN. In getting started I really struggled with tag roads and was mainly focusing on tagging them so they would display nice and label properly in the mapnik renderer. In starting to get my feet wet I been looking into whether I could leverage the data in my web applications to create a road basemap. I am on the fence on whether we can use it or not. The biggest reason I have not jumped into using it at this point is because of the in ability to render nice consistent road labels (specifically highway and county road shields) like you see in Google and Bing maps. If I could do this I would have jump right in and started using the OSM data, but the way it stands now would take a fair amount of work to revise tags to make a nice basemap.
I would not overlook the importance of users ultimately just wanting to use the data to easily make a nice road map that includes highway shields as labels. You all know way more about the history of the OSM data than me but I thought I would give you the perspective from an outside person looking and evaluating whether OSM data could be used as a replacement for a nice looking road basemap. I'll be looking forward to seeing the final US roadway classification guidelines and will likely help me determine if OSM data is a good fit to renderer basemaps for my web applications. I hope there is some considerations for rendering (specifically highway shields).
This is all very interesting discussions and I'm curious to see where it goes.
Brian Fischer, CFM GIS Project Manager
Houston Engineering, Inc.
Phone: Direct: 763-493-6664 / W: 763.493.4522 / M: 763.229.2734
-----Original Message-----
From: talk-us-bounces at openstreetmap.org [mailto:talk-us-bounces at openstreetmap.org] On Behalf Of talk-us-request at openstreetmap.org
Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 10:30 AM
To: talk-us at openstreetmap.org
Subject: Talk-us Digest, Vol 32, Issue 32
Send Talk-us mailing list submissions to
talk-us at openstreetmap.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
talk-us-request at openstreetmap.org
You can reach the person managing the list at
talk-us-owner at openstreetmap.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of Talk-us digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: United States Roadway Classification Guidelines
(McGuire, Matthew)
2. Re: United States Roadway Classification Guidelines
(Nathan Edgars II)
3. Re: United States Roadway Classification Guidelines (Jim McAndrew)
4. Re: United States Roadway Classification Guidelines
(Brad Neuhauser)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2010 08:40:36 -0500
From: "McGuire, Matthew" <Matt.McGuire at metc.state.mn.us>
To: 'Nathan Edgars II' <neroute2 at gmail.com>
Cc: Anthony <osm at inbox.org>, Kevin Atkinson <kevin at atkinson.dhs.org>,
Ian Dees <ian.dees at gmail.com>, "talk-us at openstreetmap.org"
<talk-us at openstreetmap.org>
Subject: Re: [Talk-us] United States Roadway Classification Guidelines
Message-ID:
<B2534E15F9F8894CA64BA78781EFC458B7CCD3850E at EXCHMB1.mc.local>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
> Can you show me an area of the US that's tagged completely objectively?
For example: Interstate 99 near Altoona, PA is coded (AFAIK appropriately) a motorway. Over the entire length of the Interstate, it looks like it serves a max average daily traffic of 37,000 vehicles per day (http://www.interstate-guide.com/i-099.html), which is equivalent to many "primary" roads.
Given this volume, it is reasonable to imagine Interstate 99 was never built. Instead there is a four lane, at-grade highway. The road would still serve the same interregional travel purpose in the area network. It could have the same traffic volume. But it wouldn't be a motorway.
Interstate 99 doesn't share other qualities of Interstates (traffic volume, Interstate Travel, connecting large cities) Therefore, the current classification of motorway is based on the physical quality of the road.
I've also been on ridiculously under-designed two lane roads in the Philadelphia and other Northeastern suburbs that carry large loads of commuter traffic. They function as primary or secondary roads, but they aren't built like the ones in my area and should not be classified the same way. If they code it as such, it will only serve to alienate visitors.
This is the North Bethlehem Pike north of Philadelphia. http://www.openstreetmap.org/?way=12336821 It is coded as a primary road.
This is Bass Lake Road west of Minneapolis. http://www.openstreetmap.org/?way=41442915 It is coded as secondary.
I'll let you dig up what the roads look like with whatever tools you're comfortable with. But the way it looks to me is that functionally, they are probably both accurate. Physically, the secondary road is a much more robust road.
These differences are reflective of regional differences, and I did not need to spend much time looking for them. If they are all coded by relative local function, we whitewash regional differences - the interesting (useful, if that's a requirement) bits to me.
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2010 10:39:51 -0400
From: Nathan Edgars II <neroute2 at gmail.com>
To: "McGuire, Matthew" <Matt.McGuire at metc.state.mn.us>
Cc: Anthony <osm at inbox.org>, Kevin Atkinson <kevin at atkinson.dhs.org>,
Ian Dees <ian.dees at gmail.com>, "talk-us at openstreetmap.org"
<talk-us at openstreetmap.org>
Subject: Re: [Talk-us] United States Roadway Classification Guidelines
Message-ID:
<AANLkTimQ_xaX3+xvsLw1tdWr_mWbGUjNMG1hvEf2c0hn at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 9:40 AM, McGuire, Matthew <Matt.McGuire at metc.state.mn.us> wrote:
>> Can you show me an area of the US that's tagged completely objectively?
>
> For example: Interstate 99 near Altoona, PA is coded (AFAIK appropriately) a motorway. Over the entire length of the Interstate, it looks like it serves a max average daily traffic of 37,000 vehicles per day (http://www.interstate-guide.com/i-099.html), which is equivalent to many "primary" roads.
>
> Given this volume, it is reasonable to imagine Interstate 99 was never built. Instead there is a four lane, at-grade highway. The road would still serve the same interregional travel purpose in the area network. It could have the same traffic volume. But it wouldn't be a motorway.
>
> Interstate 99 doesn't share other qualities of Interstates (traffic volume, Interstate Travel, connecting large cities) Therefore, the current classification of motorway is based on the physical quality of the road.
I know that motorway is based on physical characteristics. I'm asking for an area where every road is tagged objectively.
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2010 11:04:09 -0400
From: Jim McAndrew <jim at loc8.us>
To: "McGuire, Matthew" <Matt.McGuire at metc.state.mn.us>
Cc: Nathan Edgars II <neroute2 at gmail.com>, Anthony <osm at inbox.org>,
Kevin Atkinson <kevin at atkinson.dhs.org>, Ian Dees
<ian.dees at gmail.com>, "talk-us at openstreetmap.org"
<talk-us at openstreetmap.org>
Subject: Re: [Talk-us] United States Roadway Classification Guidelines
Message-ID:
<AANLkTimLWMrOD_MUL9OPgRThFV-nDHJozL4f5Gmr3nwJ at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
As someone who has driven on these routes quite a number of times, I can say that PA roads are not up to the same standards as roads pretty much anywhere else in the country. When roads come into the state from NJ, they all go from 3-4 lanes down to two. Which is fine for a rural highway, but not I-76 going through Philadelphia. I think that as far as people living in those areas, they would believe their road to be a primary road, even if it is only a two lane road with a lot of stoplights. The terms "primary" and "secondary" are relative terms and they should be labeled as relative. It would be interesting to add the traffic count data to the ways and possibly use that to display the width of the road.
As for the two Pennsylvania roads mentioned, there are my local perceptions on them:
I-99 is a special case where a congressman wanted a road to go from the PA turnpike to I-80, he threw a bunch of money at it, and made up a new number to assign to it. The road never really was meant to be an interstate, and I think the state reluctantly accepted it being called an interstate only after the I-99 signs were put up. It doesn't follow interstate conventions or anything. It is a limited access highway though, and the speed limit is
65 the whole way. As a driver on the road, I wouldn't notice a difference between it and I-80.
As far as Bethlehem Pike, the road was largely replace by Route 309 and 378. It is a very old road and follows Native American trails. In some areas, it still exists as an arterial road. The road is not used for any long distance travel, because people traveling further would be using route 309. Route 309 and Bethlehem Pike are concurrent for much of the way through Montgomeryville, and further north at the bypass, there's a Bethlehem Pike and an Old Bethlehem Pike, showing the evolution of the roadway. In any case, Bethlehem Pike near the southernmost bypass of route
309 would be a secondary road in my opinion, as anyone looking to travel for more than a few miles would travel on 309.
In contrast to that, there is a road called "Easton Road" which is labeled as route 611. It probably matches Bethlehem Pike in robustness, but for travelers, there is no better alternate road to much of northern Bucks county, and it could be listed as a primary road through that region.
On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 9:40 AM, McGuire, Matthew < Matt.McGuire at metc.state.mn.us> wrote:
> > Can you show me an area of the US that's tagged completely objectively?
>
> For example: Interstate 99 near Altoona, PA is coded (AFAIK
> appropriately) a motorway. Over the entire length of the Interstate,
> it looks like it serves a max average daily traffic of 37,000 vehicles
> per day ( http://www.interstate-guide.com/i-099.html), which is
> equivalent to many "primary" roads.
>
> Given this volume, it is reasonable to imagine Interstate 99 was never
> built. Instead there is a four lane, at-grade highway. The road would
> still serve the same interregional travel purpose in the area network.
> It could have the same traffic volume. But it wouldn't be a motorway.
>
> Interstate 99 doesn't share other qualities of Interstates (traffic
> volume, Interstate Travel, connecting large cities) Therefore, the
> current classification of motorway is based on the physical quality of the road.
>
> I've also been on ridiculously under-designed two lane roads in the
> Philadelphia and other Northeastern suburbs that carry large loads of
> commuter traffic. They function as primary or secondary roads, but
> they aren't built like the ones in my area and should not be
> classified the same way. If they code it as such, it will only serve to alienate visitors.
>
> This is the North Bethlehem Pike north of Philadelphia.
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/?way=12336821 It is coded as a primary road.
>
> This is Bass Lake Road west of Minneapolis.
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/?way=41442915 It is coded as secondary.
>
> I'll let you dig up what the roads look like with whatever tools
> you're comfortable with. But the way it looks to me is that
> functionally, they are probably both accurate. Physically, the
> secondary road is a much more robust road.
>
> These differences are reflective of regional differences, and I did
> not need to spend much time looking for them. If they are all coded by
> relative local function, we whitewash regional differences - the
> interesting (useful, if that's a requirement) bits to me.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/attachments/20100729/80f226a2/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2010 10:29:54 -0500
From: Brad Neuhauser <brad.neuhauser at gmail.com>
To: "McGuire, Matthew" <Matt.McGuire at metc.state.mn.us>
Cc: Nathan Edgars II <neroute2 at gmail.com>, Anthony <osm at inbox.org>,
Kevin Atkinson <kevin at atkinson.dhs.org>, Ian Dees
<ian.dees at gmail.com>, "talk-us at openstreetmap.org"
<talk-us at openstreetmap.org>
Subject: Re: [Talk-us] United States Roadway Classification Guidelines
Message-ID:
<AANLkTi=uLmRg_T=xpOue+LJTcLAvZXmz_FjoNPKWmSYL at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Regarding Matthew's earlier point ("Agreed. There is no observation that will tell you whether a road is more important than another road that is not where you are. But you can identify physical characteristics. A lot of these observations will lead to a coherent
whole."): it seems like if you take this to its logical conclusion, you're saying highways should just be tagged by physically observable characteristics, and rendering should go off that and drop the primary/secondary/tertiary etc? But I think *maybe* we can all agree that primary/secondary/tertiary are--or more accurately, could be :)--a convenient shorthand for entering/viewing roads data and for rendering. It's a matter of what that shorthand is pointing to.
(plus, I personally have no interest in tagging lanes or speed limit on roads, but maybe others do?)
Which brings us to the objective v. subjective question. Does our shorthand point to an objective system that is always applied exactly the same way in all situations? The more I've worked with OSM and data in general (especially at a statewide or national scale), the more I've come to the conclusion that it is hard to get one size to fit all. I think if we could agree on a solution that is 95% perfect, 5% do-what-you-need-to-do-for-it-to-make-sense-in-your-area, that'd be good enough for now, and far better than the confusion engendered by conflicting schemes spread across the wiki. Kevin's proposal seems to be headed in that direction.
Cheers, Brad
On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 8:40 AM, McGuire, Matthew <Matt.McGuire at metc.state.mn.us> wrote:
>> Can you show me an area of the US that's tagged completely objectively?
>
> For example: Interstate 99 near Altoona, PA is coded (AFAIK appropriately) a motorway. Over the entire length of the Interstate, it looks like it serves a max average daily traffic of 37,000 vehicles per day (http://www.interstate-guide.com/i-099.html), which is equivalent to many "primary" roads.
>
> Given this volume, it is reasonable to imagine Interstate 99 was never built. Instead there is a four lane, at-grade highway. The road would still serve the same interregional travel purpose in the area network. It could have the same traffic volume. But it wouldn't be a motorway.
>
> Interstate 99 doesn't share other qualities of Interstates (traffic volume, Interstate Travel, connecting large cities) Therefore, the current classification of motorway is based on the physical quality of the road.
>
> I've also been on ridiculously under-designed two lane roads in the Philadelphia and other Northeastern suburbs that carry large loads of commuter traffic. They function as primary or secondary roads, but they aren't built like the ones in my area and should not be classified the same way. If they code it as such, it will only serve to alienate visitors.
>
> This is the North Bethlehem Pike north of Philadelphia. http://www.openstreetmap.org/?way=12336821 It is coded as a primary road.
>
> This is Bass Lake Road west of Minneapolis. http://www.openstreetmap.org/?way=41442915 It is coded as secondary.
>
> I'll let you dig up what the roads look like with whatever tools you're comfortable with. But the way it looks to me is that functionally, they are probably both accurate. Physically, the secondary road is a much more robust road.
>
> These differences are reflective of regional differences, and I did not need to spend much time looking for them. If they are all coded by relative local function, we whitewash regional differences - the interesting (useful, if that's a requirement) bits to me.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us at openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
End of Talk-us Digest, Vol 32, Issue 32
***************************************
More information about the Talk-us
mailing list