[Talk-us] Improving coverage of exit numbers and destinations on motorways

[Duane Gearhart]

Hey all,

I believe the way-junction:ref should be used in addition to the node-ref
only when needed at splits - like this example:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Exit_Info#A.2FB_Split_Example
These types of splits do not happen very often - however, when they do -
having the way-junction:ref helps to improve the guidance for the user at
key decision points.

Regards,
Duane


On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 10:02 AM, Jinal Foflia <fofliajinal at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Paul,
>
> These are good points, but it does not look like the `junction:ref`
> tagging scheme is very common. Till there is widespread usage by the
> community we will continue to follow the conventional tagging of the
> reference numbers on the motorway_junction node [1].
>
> Curious to know what the others think of the `junction:ref` tag.
>
> Cheers,
> Jinal Foflia
>
>
> [1] http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=highway%3Dmotorway_junction
>
>
> On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 3:49 PM, Paul Johnson <baloo at ursamundi.org> wrote:
>
>> I'm wondering why the push to tag a node with directional information
>> when tagging the first segment of the diverging way would be more concise
>> and already had support in some navigational data consumers?  This handles
>> weird situations where ramps diverge to the left or from a lane other than
>> the edge much more cleanly.
>>
>> For example, Exit 2 in West Tulsa on I 244. First segment could be tagged
>> as...
>>
>> name=Okmulgee Beeline
>> junction:ref=2
>> destination=Okmulgee
>> destination:ref=US 75 South
>> ref=US 75
>> highway=motorway
>>
>> Or, the number 3 lane exit westbound US 26 north of Beaverton at exit 71A
>> (lanes 1, 2 and 4 remain on US 26, oddly enough).
>>
>> name=Canyon Road
>> highway=motorway_link
>> ref=OR 8
>> junction:ref=71A
>> destination=Beaverton
>> destination:ref=OR 8 West
>>
>> This along with the departure angle, gives navigation systems ample
>> information to accurately describe the ramp that point data just leaves out.
>>
>>
>> On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 4:46 AM, Jinal Foflia <fofliajinal at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> There has been a recent push to improve the coverage of exit numbers and
>>> destination signs on the motorways in the US by the data team at Mapbox.
>>> Some context here [1][2][3][4]. The primary sources of data were DoT
>>> documents and Mapillary images. The secondary source was Wikipedia, but as
>>> per the conversation with the local mappers, it is not a good idea to
>>> completely trust wikipedia documents for mapping the exit numbers and
>>> destinations. There are certain highways which do not have Mapillary
>>> coverage and it is difficult to validate/identify the missing exit numbers
>>> and destination. It will be a great help if local mappers can help share
>>> reliable sources and validate the existing data that will help improve the
>>> coverage of this data on the map
>>>
>>> We been working on this from the beginning of April and reviewed more
>>> than 220 highways in 9 states. The goal would be to authenticate all
>>> the existing data and fill in the gaps using verifiable sources wherever
>>> possible.
>>>
>>> Here is the Overpass query to get a better sense of the stats:
>>>
>>> * Total motorway_junction edited by team in last two weeks: 179 [5]
>>>
>>> This is the detailed workflow for *Exit mapping* [6] and *Destination
>>> mapping* [7] that was used for this mapping activity. Would be great to
>>> hear your feedback on how it can be improved for further such tasks, please
>>> drop a comment on the *project tracker* [3] .
>>>
>>> I want to thank all of you in the community for giving feedback, calling
>>> us out on the occasional errors, and working with us to improve signpost
>>> mapping conventions. I feel proud to be a member of such a great mapping
>>> community!
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> Jinal Foflia
>>>
>>> [1] https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/jinalfoflia/diary/38501
>>>
>>> [2] https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/jinalfoflia/diary/38342
>>>
>>> [3] https://github.com/mapbox/mapping/issues/178
>>>
>>> [4] https://github.com/mapbox/mapping/issues/169
>>>
>>> [5] http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/fzA
>>>
>>> [6]
>>> https://gist.github.com/poornibadrinath/a8f3652deb566d95b848c5e9cd68011f
>>>
>>> [7]
>>> https://gist.github.com/poornibadrinath/f982a947c6a063ed1a9016a2d3246d4a
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Talk-us mailing list
>>> Talk-us at openstreetmap.org
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Talk-us mailing list
>> Talk-us at openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/attachments/20160503/dbf8c037/attachment-0001.html>