[Talk-us] Boston speed limit too Re: Michigan speed limit changes coming soon

Bill Ricker bill.n1vux at gmail.com
Sat Jan 7 20:20:39 UTC 2017


Tod - "Makes sense to have the OSM tagging model the real world in this
regard. If we had that the a local mapper could update one value on the
administrative boundary and all the roads without explicit maxspeed tagging
would be covered."

Agreed. There isn't a better community than OSM to maintain it.
If our allied open routing project provides a side repository outside the
main OSM but linked (the way e.g. our Notes are) I would happily update
that.
Without that being created, OSM admin boundary seems the right place.

​--
Bill Ricker
bill.n1vux at gmail.com @n1vux

​[ full reply included below so cc: talk-us-mass has full context ] ​

On Sat, Jan 7, 2017 at 2:25 PM, Tod Fitch <tod at fitchdesign.com> wrote:

> > On Jan 7, 2017, at 10:57 AM, Bill Ricker <bill.n1vux at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, Jan 7, 2017 at 12:44 AM, Jack Burke <burkejf3 at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Hey, Michigan folks, keep an eye out for some speed limit changes....
> [1]
> >
> > We have a different change hitting Boston as of this last week -- the
> > statutory limit on *UNSIGNED* roads/streets in Boston has changed.
> >
> > Statutory limit had been the state's 30mph (thickly settled or
> > business district).
> >
> > One might presume since this changes only unsigned speed, we haven't
> > entered it, so nothing to change.
> > But how is a router to know ?
> >
> > [1] http://www.mlive.com/news/index.ssf/2017/01/75-mph_
> speed_limits_officially.html
> > [2] http://www.mit.edu/~jfc/ma.html
> >
>
> Too bad that every time someone proposes having default values based on
> administrative boundaries it gets shot down like this one [1] was.
>
> Many, in fact, almost all residential streets in my state are not signed
> with speed limits. I think that is true in most states, but the default
> values definitely change with jurisdiction. If I tag them with the default
> legal limit when there is no signing, I run the risk that they are not
> updated if the law changes. And a person driving the street can’t verify
> the value just by looking. If I don’t tag it, then the routing software
> will make an assumption on what the speed is and the assumption is likely
> based on the part of the world the people writing the software live and
> very likely won’t match my area.
>
> To the people who then say that data should be kept outside of OSM as you
> can’t see it on the ground: Point me to a place were a router can get a
> world wide set of administrative based default speed limits. To be viable
> for routers to use it would need to be an open geographical database.
> Funny, that is what OSM is supposed to be.
>
> Makes sense to have the OSM tagging model the real world in this regard.
> If we had that the a local mapper could update one value on the
> administrative boundary and all the roads without explicit maxspeed tagging
> would be covered.
>
> [1] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2016-
> October/030330.html
>
>
>
​
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/attachments/20170107/aa9da9ff/attachment.html>


More information about the Talk-us mailing list