[Talk-us] US Bicycle Routes in KY, TN, AL, MS, and GA
alex at mapbox.com
Mon Mar 11 12:11:46 UTC 2013
> This is a concern about there being no active project to develop a route
but having a
route showing on OSM/OCM.
If that's the situation it seems we have a clear cut case at hand: the
routes in question just aren't `proposed`.
Kerry - have you reviewed the OSM data in question and tried to get in
touch with the mapper(s) who created the route?
A clarification on http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:proposed could
also be in order.
On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 7:53 AM, KerryIrons <irons54vortex at sbcglobal.net>wrote:
> You have summarized it well. This is NOT " about having an actual
> proposal and being concerned about it becoming widely available." This is
> concern about there being no active project to develop a route but having a
> route showing on OSM/OCM. Minh Nguyen has provided an example of how to
> document a developing route being done by the Ohio DOT. This is the kind
> communication and coordination we are seeking.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Greg Troxel [mailto:gdt at ir.bbn.com]
> Sent: Sunday, March 10, 2013 8:32 PM
> To: KerryIrons
> Cc: 'OpenStreetMap talk-us list'
> Subject: Re: [Talk-us] US Bicycle Routes in KY, TN, AL, MS, and GA
> I think Kerry's concern is about "proposed" routes being in the OSM db (and
> renders) when no such proposed routes exist. Taking a line from wikipedia
> (which I realize is tricky business), we shouldn't be doing original
> research in determining things, but rather documenting things that exist.
> If there are signs and a published route, that's obviously a route. If an
> organization that is generally viewed as having the authority to determine
> route has published a proposal (which is stronger than 6 what-if
> then that's fair to be in as proposed. But as I understand the situation,
> cognizant organization has published a target corridor, not a proposed
> But, this could be about having an actual published proposal and being
> concerned about it becoming widely available, and stopping that doesn't fit
> with OSM norms.
> I am also a little surprised about using the OSM database for "what if"
> rendering. It makes sense to use OSM data as the baselayer, and the
> toolchain for rendering what if, but if there isn't at least a published
> plan for a route (as in "this route is in the state's 20-year plan and
> working on funding, but if we had money this is what we'd do right now"),
> then putting various things people might want to do in the database seems
> be very far away from verifiable and even not meeting the "accurately
> describe the world" test. But perhaps I misread some of the earlier
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us at openstreetmap.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Talk-us