[Talk-us] Motorway tagging
Anthony Costanzo
acjames28 at gmail.com
Fri Jan 28 22:22:44 UTC 2022
Since this debate has now come up again, would like it on the record here
that IMO a motorway (or freeway, per US English, though OSM tags use
British English) can absolutely end at an intersection, and as others have
pointed out this is consistent both with what signs commonly say and what
other mapping services commonly show.
That said while it's fine for one to end at an intersection I wouldn't end
one at a driveway. So in the A vs B example upthread I'd go ahead and
switch it to Expressway at the west end of the last intetchange (where the
ramps merge) since there are driveways between there and the next
intersection.
On Fri, Jan 28, 2022, 14:30 <talk-us-request at openstreetmap.org> wrote:
> Send Talk-us mailing list submissions to
> talk-us at openstreetmap.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> https://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: Announcing progress: Minnesota Highway classification
> project publishes first guidance (Paul Johnson)
> 2. Re: Announcing progress: Minnesota Highway classification
> project publishes first guidance (Eric Patrick)
> 3. Re: Announcing progress: Minnesota Highway classification
> project publishes first guidance (Ian Nicholson)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2022 13:12:12 -0600
> From: Paul Johnson <baloo at ursamundi.org>
> To: "Brian M. Sperlongano" <zelonewolf at gmail.com>
> Cc: Eric Patrick <txemt1 at gmail.com>, Ian Nicholson
> <ian at binaryash.net>, Evin Fairchild <evindfair at gmail.com>,
> OpenStreetMap talk-us list <talk-us at openstreetmap.org>
> Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Announcing progress: Minnesota Highway
> classification project publishes first guidance
> Message-ID:
> <CAMPM96reabF0Hh+p4=
> DqMxKzFP0uWTWBzqv1P5YirtoLRYyAsw at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> On Fri, Jan 28, 2022 at 12:54 PM Brian M. Sperlongano <
> zelonewolf at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Rhode Island DOT also disagrees with Paul's take. For the few cases we
> > have, signage indicating the end of the freeway is always aligned to the
> > first at-grade intersection, not the final grade-separated interchange.
> > Below is a link to Google StreetView at the end of the RI-138 freeway in
> > Newport, RI. 1000 feet before the freeway ends at an at-grade traffic
> > signal there's a giant yellow sign that says "FREEWAY ENDS 1000 FT".
> >
>
> Sounds like a good case for highway=motorway_link on that section.
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/attachments/20220128/74fd3793/attachment-0001.htm
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2022 14:15:44 -0500
> From: Eric Patrick <txemt1 at gmail.com>
> To: Paul Johnson <baloo at ursamundi.org>
> Cc: "Brian M. Sperlongano" <zelonewolf at gmail.com>, Evin Fairchild
> <evindfair at gmail.com>, Ian Nicholson <ian at binaryash.net>,
> OpenStreetMap talk-us list <talk-us at openstreetmap.org>
> Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Announcing progress: Minnesota Highway
> classification project publishes first guidance
> Message-ID:
> <
> CACYhaoYgqZQBGbwNgQKKVPRw_v5_sP1MPhK4qwvWfw8CqV+OAQ at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Not on the ends of freeways.
>
> On Fri, Jan 28, 2022 at 14:12 Paul Johnson <baloo at ursamundi.org> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Jan 28, 2022 at 12:54 PM Brian M. Sperlongano <
> > zelonewolf at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Rhode Island DOT also disagrees with Paul's take. For the few cases we
> >> have, signage indicating the end of the freeway is always aligned to the
> >> first at-grade intersection, not the final grade-separated interchange.
> >> Below is a link to Google StreetView at the end of the RI-138 freeway in
> >> Newport, RI. 1000 feet before the freeway ends at an at-grade traffic
> >> signal there's a giant yellow sign that says "FREEWAY ENDS 1000 FT".
> >>
> >
> > Sounds like a good case for highway=motorway_link on that section.
> >
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/attachments/20220128/6acbd6df/attachment-0001.htm
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2022 13:27:10 -0600
> From: Ian Nicholson <ian at binaryash.net>
> To: Evin Fairchild <evindfair at gmail.com>
> Cc: OpenStreetMap talk-us list <talk-us at openstreetmap.org>
> Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Announcing progress: Minnesota Highway
> classification project publishes first guidance
> Message-ID: <69FDDA7B-9A03-425C-8EC5-9F7179E6BFB3 at binaryash.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> I don?t know if it would matter for your tagging scheme there but the way
> the road is generally maintained as well as the behavior of the users is
> that north of the on-ramp from River street, US-14/61 is not treated like
> an interstate, but between the junction with I-90 and the on/off ramp, it
> generally is.
> Or in more Minnesotan terms: it is generally considered acceptable to pull
> over to the side of the road to observe the regions nesting bald eagles
> immediately north of the on/off ramp regardless of whether you have reached
> the first at-grade intersection. The same behavior between the ramps and
> the junction with I-90 it would perhaps merit a huffy ?I don?t know what
> they?re thinking? muttered under ones breath while you smile and wave
> driving by, or a concerned local pulling over to offer assistance.
>
> Sent from my mobile device, please forgive any errors in my spelling or
> grammar.
>
> > On Jan 28, 2022, at 12:21, Evin Fairchild <evindfair at gmail.com> wrote:
> > ?
> > Paul is going to disagree with me on this, but per standard practice,
> I'd tag it as motorway up to the first at grade intersection, as that is
> the first point where anyone driving thru there will notice that they're no
> longer on a freeway if they're driving north on US 61.
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 28, 2022, 10:10 AM Ian Nicholson <ian at binaryash.net> wrote:
> >> So as someone who?s not extremely versed on this: if we assume that
> motorways should not end at at-grade intersections, how should US-61 be
> tagged where it intersects with I-90 at Dakota (this is where I-90 turns
> away from the Mississippi and heads west in the south half of Winona
> County)?
> >> 61 has on/off ramps several hundred feet north of the split, but about
> a half mile to mile north of the ramps there is an at-grade driveway to the
> southbound lane and about a half mile north of that there is a turn lane
> where the northbound lane can access a frontage road.
> >> Apologies I realize this is basic but I?ve just had a difficult time
> getting my head around these tags.
> >>
> >> Sent from my mobile device, please forgive any errors in my spelling or
> grammar.
> >>
> >>> On Jan 28, 2022, at 11:47, Bob Gambrel <rjgambrel at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> ?
> >>> Thanks Paul. I will post your thoughts. Thanks again for your insight
> >>>
> >>> On Fri, Jan 28, 2022, 11:04 AM Paul Johnson <baloo at ursamundi.org>
> wrote:
> >>>> On Fri, Jan 28, 2022 at 9:43 AM Bob Gambrel <rjgambrel at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>>>> I really want to be clear about your position so I do not misstate
> it in the channel. I know you have already covered it but if I try to piece
> it together from the thread I might get it wrong. Am stating what I think
> your position is. Let me know if I got it right ...
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 1) Barring exceptional edge cases ...
> >>>>> 2) A motorway should not end/start at an at grade intersection
> >>>>> 3) A motorway should start/end where a ramp touches the carriageway
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I cannot remember in the long thread whether you weighed in about
> the length of a motorway island. Following are questions about that. The
> slack discussion that Evin initiated is more about item (a) below and I
> want to make sure your thoughts enter that discussion ...
> >>>>>
> >>>>> a) Do you believe there is a minimum number of (non at-grade)
> interchanges there should be before we classify something as a motorway?
> For example, is a one interchange motorway island ok?
> >>>>> b) Do you have any particular concerns about the minimum length of a
> motorway island?
> >>>>
> >>>> It's a little hard to quantify, but generally speaking I'm not
> inclined to step it up for just one exit, even on long sections, mostly
> because people expect freeways to be fully controlled, without at-grade
> access, and at least two carriageways. This mostly leaves "places with a
> grade-separated junction" as the closest handy transition point. I'm
> generally hesitant about setting something to motorway if it's not a fairly
> clear case of motorway. Short islands of motorway often fall into the
> category of mapping the DOT's not-fully-realized aspirations for a freeway,
> in which case it may be useful to ask if "proposed=motorway" and
> "expressway=yes" in addition to a lower highway value is highly likely to
> be more closely accurate. I don't have a MN example offhand but being able
> to quickly distinguish the difference could mean, in PA for example,
> consumers taking I 76 instead of the immediately adjacent and
> not-quite-a-freeway US 212 when routing for shortest time, absent all other
> tags.
> >>>>
> >>>>> I hope you don't think I am being picky here. I really want to get
> your thoughts into the discussion, if you don't join it yourself.
> >>>>
> >>>> You're fine.
> >>>>
> >>>>> To recap the current guidlines in Minn: motorways islands have no
> minimum length requirement, can consist of as few as a single interchange,
> and end at the first at-grade intersection.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Fri, Jan 28, 2022 at 9:14 AM Paul Johnson <baloo at ursamundi.org>
> wrote:
> >>>>>> On Fri, Jan 28, 2022 at 8:44 AM Bob Gambrel <rjgambrel at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>>>>>> I think we are near the end of this talk-us thread. Both Evin and
> Paul have provided input along the way and I have responded as well. A few
> others added insight as well. As a result of this there is a newly opened
> discussion the the Slack #local-minnesota channel addressing this issue.
> Evin has initiated the discussion there. Other active
> highway-classification mappers are joining that discussion. Others who have
> joined this talk-us discussion are on Slack and are aware of the
> #local-minnesota channel so can participate as they see fit in that
> discussion.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Paul: I want to make sure your views are discussed there. If you
> want to join that discussion please do. If not can you summarize your
> bottom line opinions about what the wiki says now that you disagree with.
> You can provide them here or within the wiki discussion page. I am asking
> this now because it is possible that your views have changed since the
> beginning of the thread. If you post your views here I will transcribe them
> to Slack so the others can know what they are.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I think I already covered it. Only significant concern being the
> motorway part. Barring some truly exceptional edge cases, I don't think we
> should be hinting to consumers to expect a freeway heading into an at-grade
> intersection, particularly when such a situation is something I think
> everyone would expect to happen on an expressway.
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> 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/20220128/13e9eec3/attachment.htm
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Subject: Digest Footer
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of Talk-us Digest, Vol 170, Issue 28
> ****************************************
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/attachments/20220128/617eeebd/attachment-0001.htm>
More information about the Talk-us
mailing list