[Talk-us] Talk-us Digest, Vol 59, Issue 20

William Morris wboykinm at geosprocket.com
Thu Oct 18 23:58:08 GMT 2012


Third local mapper chimes in: As weird as the cartography will look (and
I've seen it appear as such on OSM in other U.S. cities), Route 7 through
Burlington has no business being listed as primary. I can hit a maximum of
25mph on the sections between stop signs, and by character that street is
more of a Residential Road.

That said, it might be worth asking public works what they think; the city
transportation layer on VCGI marks it as primary, but I wonder how they
treat it locally (particularly with snow removal priority).

Either way the summit drink of choice should probably be a switchback :)

-Bill
North Ave.

On Thursday, October 18, 2012, wrote:

> 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: What is the status of the Toolbox? (Richard Fairhurst)
>    2. Burlington, Vermont road classification (Andrew Guertin)
>    3. Re: Burlington, Vermont road classification (Richard Weait)
>    4. Re: Burlington, Vermont road classification (Andrew Guertin)
>    5. Re: Burlington, Vermont road classification (Alan Millar)
>    6. Re: Burlington, Vermont road classification (Dale Puch)
>    7. Re: Burlington, Vermont road classification (Mike N)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 17:54:49 +0100
> From: Richard Fairhurst <richard at systemeD.net>
> To: talk-us at openstreetmap.org
> Subject: Re: [Talk-us] What is the status of the Toolbox?
> Message-ID: <50803459.4020205 at systemeD.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> Charlotte Wolter wrote:
> > What is the status of the Toolbox? When will it be fixed? It is
> > difficult to do any editing without those tools. And, whose idea was
> > that banner? Did they ask anyone before they implemented it?  Did
> > they test to make sure it didn't break anything?
>
> Goodness me, Charlotte, you are hard work sometimes.
>
> I'm assuming you're referring to the Potlatch 2 toolbox, though you
> don't say.
>
> I am working on it Right Now and have been doing so for the last hour. I
> would have fixed it yesterday were it not for your opinionising of the
> trac ticket, which exasperated me sufficiently that I went and did
> something else instead. Right now I am trying not to get similarly
> exasperated... though clearly not with much success. :|
>
> Richard
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 16:48:39 -0400
> From: Andrew Guertin <andrew.guertin at uvm.edu>
> To: talk-us at openstreetmap.org
> Subject: [Talk-us] Burlington, Vermont road classification
> Message-ID: <50806B27.60204 at uvm.edu>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> Hi,
>
> There are two active mappers in the Burlington, Vermont area, and we
> disagree about how the roads should be classified, so we're looking for
> more opinions.
>
> The crux of the problem is the answer to the question: Which is more
> important, outside/official classifications, or physical characteristics?
>
> The tagging pages on the wiki don't really provide clarity on this
> matter. For example, from [1],
> > Almost all other U.S. Highways get highway=primary. A primary
> > highway generally provides the best route (excluding motorways)
> > connecting adjacent cities or communities
>
> > Even where U.S. Highways connect only smaller communities, they still
> > merit highway=primary
>
> but
>
> > Primary highways generally lack stop signs; however, stop signs may
> > control major intersections in rural areas with low traffic volumes
> > and occur rarely elsewhere.
>
>
> The most notable example of this is North Willard Street[2]. It is part
> of US Route 7, but as can be seen with Bing Imagery, it is narrow, made
> narrower by street parking on both sides, and is controlled by stop
> signs. Similarly, Main Street is part of US Route 2, but has many
> lights, and does not even satisfy the "near the highest speed generally
> allowed on surface streets" note about secondary streets.
>
> Of note, there is in fact no path to get from US 7 south of Burlington
> to US 7 north of Burlington without stopping at at least one stop sign,
> except for the interstate. Should this imply that there just aren't any
> major roads here?
>
>
> We're especially interested in input from nearby states--the rest of New
> England and northern New York, but of course anyone with an opinion
> please chime in!
>
> Thanks,
> --Andrew
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_States_roads_tagging
> [2]
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=44.48388&lon=-73.20368&zoom=16&layers=M
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 17:07:12 -0400
> From: Richard Weait <richard at weait.com>
> To: Andrew Guertin <andrew.guertin at uvm.edu>
> Cc: talk-us at openstreetmap.org
> Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Burlington, Vermont road classification
> Message-ID:
>         <CAGwUD5uBVUm2gGJrdxQxM_dyeZ1xJnhGEoh3hzLLWOY=
> jHi21A at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 4:48 PM, Andrew Guertin <andrew.guertin at uvm.edu>
> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > There are two active mappers in the Burlington, Vermont area, and we
> > disagree about how the roads should be classified, so we're looking for
> > more opinions.
>
> If you are both local mappers, I suggest that you actually meet face
> to face and share a beverage.  As mappers, you both have much more in
> common, in your concerns about this great project, then you have
> differences on this small matter of tagging.
>
> Over a coffee, or other beverage of choice, talk and argue about
> favourite editor, preferred survey methods, favourite rendering and
> the benefits of each of your mapper baseball cards.  Then settle this
> little thing about the precise classification of a few local roads.
> It doesn't matter how you settle it.  Divide the town in odd-even
> blocks, or take roads at the front back half of the alphabet, or take
> turns being right from north to south in town.
>
> But settle it.  You two should be enjoying the camaraderie of your
> shared interest.  Not fussing over trivialities.  :-)
>
> Now, if only one of you is local, and the difference is purely matter
> of opinion, then it's easy.  Local mapper wins by on the ground rule.*
>
> * note: on the ground rule doesn't apply if I'm involved.  Then "I
> win" is the rule we go by.  :-)
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 17:26:51 -0400
> From: Andrew Guertin <andrew.guertin at uvm.edu>
> To: talk-us at openstreetmap.org
> Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Burlington, Vermont road classification
> Message-ID: <5080741B.9030007 at uvm.edu>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> On 10/18/2012 05:07 PM, Richard Weait wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 4:48 PM, Andrew Guertin <andrew.guertin at uvm.edu>
> wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> There are two active mappers in the Burlington, Vermont area, and we
> >> disagree about how the roads should be classified, so we're looking for
> >> more opinions.
> >
> > If you are both local mappers, I suggest that you actually meet face
> > to face and share a beverage.  [...]
>
> While not a bad idea, I don't think that this is necessary or helpful
> for this case. We're both impressed with each other's work, and (it
> seems through text at least) perfectly willing to accept the other's
> viewpoint, it's just that now we've realized that the docs are ambiguous
> enough to make *both* viewpoints valid, and we'd like to choose the one
> that most closely matches the rest of the map, especially in nearby areas.
>
> In other words, amicable disagreement, not a budding edit war. :)
>
> --Andrew
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 15:11:13 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Alan Millar <grunthos503 at yahoo.com>
> To: "talk-us at openstreetmap.org" <talk-us at openstreetmap.org>
> Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Burlington, Vermont road classification
> Message-ID:
>         <1350598273.10049.YahooMailNeo at web140906.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> The crux of the problem is the answer to the question: Which is more
> >important, outside/official classifications, or physical characteristics?
> >
> >The tagging pages on the wiki don't really provide clarity on this
> >matter.
> >
> Although the wiki may not be very clear, this subject has been discussed
> extensively on talk-us in the last year or two.? For the highway tag in
> particular, the consensus I've seen is that it is definitely more about the
> physical characteristics, "driveability", and perhaps perceived local
> importance than any government classifications.? Yes, part of that is
> subjective.?? Highway=motorway in particular is about physical
> characteristics, regardless of being state, US, or Interstate highway.?
> Primary/secondary/tertiary are more related to size and/or local
> importance, which sometimes matches gov't classifications but often does
> not.? (Related to this is the "ref" tag, used to designate official route
> numbers.)
>
> - Alan
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/attachments/20121018/cbdc4273/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 18:11:48 -0400
> From: Dale Puch <dale.puch at gmail.com>
> To: Andrew Guertin <andrew.guertin at uvm.edu>
> Cc: talk-us at openstreetmap.org
> Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Burlington, Vermont road classification
> Message-ID:
>         <
> CA+akea9V-otuY5GQHero27KLJGa3Op+Yc4W0HttAWDKbVizVhg at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> Bottom line is it is subjective.  Be friendly, make a compromise and have
> fun mapping.
>
> This is something that has shown up a few times that I recall.  What I
> remember from that is primary rely on "ground truth" but it can be adjusted
> for map consistency and other extenuating factors.  Unfortunately that
> comes under the judgment of the mappers.
>
> Examples: I remember there are Interstates that are actually unpaved in
> places, but tagged like all the rest of the interstates with perhaps
> surface=unpaved ect.  I think Alaska might be good examples of this but
> haven't checked into it myself.  Another is where the road conditions
> change for a mile or two before reverting back.  Especially if this happens
> several times in a row it is usually desirable to keep one classification
> instead of going back and forth.  Relative conditions of the area also come
> into play.  It isn't always a question of the road at that specific point
> meeting a set of requirements.
>
> Specifically for your example of US 7 and route 2.   Both seem to connect
> the center of burlington to other major roads and populations centers, not
> just a local road.
>
> My answer that isn't an answer.... :p
> Dale
>
> On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 4:48 PM, Andrew Guertin <andrew.guertin at uvm.edu
> >wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > There are two active mappers in the Burlington, Vermont area, and we
> > disagree about how the roads should be classified, so we're looking for
> > more opinions.
> >
> > The crux of the problem is the answer to the question: Which is more
> > important, outside/official classifications, or physical characteristics?
> >
> > The tagging pages on the wiki don't really provide clarity on this
> > matter. For example, from [1],
> > > Almost all other U.S. Highways get highway=primary. A primary
> > > highway generally provides the best route (excluding motorways)
> > > connecting adjacent cities or communities
> >
> > > Even where U.S. Highways connect only smaller communities, they still
> > > merit highway=primary
> >
> > but
> >
> > > Primary highways generally lack stop signs; however, stop signs may
> > > control major intersections in rural areas with low traffic volumes
> > > and occur rarely elsewhere.
> >
> >
> > The most notable example of this is North Willard Street[2]. It is part
> > of US Route 7, but as can be seen with Bing Imagery, it is narrow, made
> > narrower by street parking on both sides, and is controlled by stop
> > signs. Similarly, Main Street is part of US Route 2, but has many
> > lights, and does not even satisfy the "near the highest speed generally
> > allowed on surface streets" note about secondary streets.
> >
> > Of note, there is in fact no path to get from US 7 south of Burlington
> > to US 7 north of Burlington without stopping at at least one stop sign,
> > except for the interstate. Should this imply that there just aren't any
> > major roads here?
> >
> >
> > We're especially interested in input from nearby states--the rest of New
> > England and northern New York, but of course anyone with an opinion
> > please chime in!
> >
> > Thanks,
> > --Andrew
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > [1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_States_roads_tagging
> > [2]
> >
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=44.48388&lon=-73.20368&zoom=16&layers=M
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Talk-us mailing list
> > Talk-us at openstreetmap.org
> > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Dale Puch
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/attachments/20121018/9e17a0c8/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 18:17:16 -0400
> From: Mike N <niceman at att.net>
> To: talk-us at openstreetmap.org
> Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Burlington, Vermont road classification
> Message-ID: <50807FEC.8080000 at att.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> On 10/18/2012 4:48 PM, Andrew Guertin wrote:
> > The most notable example of this is North Willard Street[2]. It is part
> > of US Route 7, but as can be seen with Bing Imagery, it is narrow, made
> > narrower by street parking on both sides, and is controlled by stop
> > signs. Similarly, Main Street is part of US Route 2, but has many
> > lights, and does not even satisfy the "near the highest speed generally
> > allowed on surface streets" note about secondary streets.
>
>    An uninformed opinion - armchair only, and from a different part of
> the country.
>
>   An informal US OSM convention is that US highways are generally a
> minimum of primary, no matter how small the highway is when going
> through a town.   I would say that this is especially valid when there
> are no better driving routes nearby with lower legal classification.
> It would be a gray area to me if an alternate state or county route had
> better driving attributes (width, speed, traffic control devices etc).
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> ____________________________________



-- 
----------
William Morris
Cartographer
(802)-870-0880
wboykinm at geosprocket.com
Twitter: @vtcraghead

GeoSprocket LLC, Burlington VT
www.geosprocket.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/attachments/20121018/dc4a9bd3/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Talk-us mailing list