[Talk-us] US Bicycle Routes in KY, TN, AL, MS, and GA

KerryIrons irons54vortex at sbcglobal.net
Mon Mar 11 14:12:11 UTC 2013


Alex,

I am in contact with the mappers involved as they have responded to my initial message.  This discussion with your mappers group has been very constructive.  I am not familiar with your wiki and will look into that.  I am not an OSM/OCM mapper but rather involved in the process of developing US Bicycle Routes.  I have done some mapping work in Google Maps and am familiar with/frustrated by its limitations.  Likewise the MapMyRide system.  I am just learning OSM/OCM.

At the risk of repeating myself, the goal is to have coordination and communication with the mapper community during the development of US Bicycle Routes.  Minh Nguyen's efforts in Ohio with US Bicycle Route 50 show the kind of collaboration that will be productive for all concerned.

Kerry

-----Original Message-----
From: Alex Barth [mailto:alex at mapbox.com] 
Sent: Monday, March 11, 2013 8:12 AM
To: KerryIrons
Cc: Greg Troxel; OpenStreetMap talk-us list
Subject: Re: [Talk-us] US Bicycle Routes in KY, TN, AL, MS, and GA

> 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:
Greg,

You have summarized it well.  This is NOT " about having an actual published
proposal and being concerned about it becoming widely available."  This is a
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 of
communication and coordination we are seeking.


Kerry

-----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 a
route has published a proposal (which is stronger than 6 what-if scenarios),
then that's fair to be in as proposed.  But as I understand the situation, a
cognizant organization has published a target corridor, not a proposed
route.

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 we're
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 to
be very far away from verifiable and even not meeting the "accurately
describe the world" test.  But perhaps I misread some of the earlier
comments.



_______________________________________________
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us at openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us





More information about the Talk-us mailing list