[OSM-talk] FW: Highway tags and other junk

[Andy Robinson]

sorry, missed the list

Andy Robinson
Andy_J_Robinson at blueyonder.co.uk 

-----Original Message-----
From: Andy Robinson [mailto:Andy_J_Robinson at blueyonder.co.uk] 
Sent: 14 December 2006 7:32 AM
To: 'Tom Chance'
Subject: RE: [OSM-talk] Highway tags and other junk

Tom Chance wrote:
>Sent: 14 December 2006 7:05 AM
>To: talk at openstreetmap.org
>Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Highway tags and other junk
>
>Ahoy,
>
>On Thursday 14 December 2006 03:22, Ben Robbins wrote:
>> Before you  say these don’t need to be labeled separately please note
>that
>> the average speed on the 1st type would be about 55mph, while on the 4th
>it
>> would be about 15mph.  A route planner must sort these apart.
>
>That can be covered with the speed limit tag.
>
>
>> 1)  Make an additional value, which has 4 possible tags in which you
>enter
>> 1 of them.  These are predefined by how they appear in the field.
>> 2)  Have 4 tags to go under highway.
>
>I think the best way to go would be to clearly separate the official
>classification (probably unclassified in these cases) from the physical
>features (width, surface condition, etc.) and features relevant for
>particular contexts (speed limit, safety for cyclists, pavement, etc.)
>
>If we made this distinction then it would suddenly make it easy for you to
>have a really good schema for different gradations of track, as you have
>developed on the wiki. I suppose that with the current schema it seems a
>bit
>overkill for most people's needs, so ends up existing in parallel with the
>more blunt "highway=track" tag.
>
>It has been a long while since I scanned every message on this list, but
>whatever happened to the proposed new feature schema that took into account
>these different categories of properties? Was it Andy Robinson who was
>diligently working on it in his spare time?
>

Indeed it was me, and I'm hoping to spend some more time on it over New
Year, but no promises so if anyone else is busting to do it then they are
welcome to work on it or assist.

Cheers

Andy

Andy Robinson
Andy_J_Robinson at blueyonder.co.uk 

>
>> This is a very much needed tag, as any users that don’t live in urban
>areas
>> must shorely understand.  Even if someone only wants 1 track tag, it
>still
>> should not be under highway= as a track is not a public right of way in
>any
>> form (like all the other highway tags), unless an additional tag is stuck
>> on it.  E.g.  a track may be a byway, and therefore the track has access
>> rights of the byway.
>
>Another reason why we sorely need a distinction between highway
>classification
>and surface type is a road in St Albans that has houses down it, but is
>basically a dirt track. At the moment I tagged it as highway=track but
>that's
>far from ideal.
>
>Regards,
>Tom
>
>--
>The struggle against power is the struggle of memory against forgetting
> - Kundera
>
>_______________________________________________
>talk mailing list
>talk at openstreetmap.org
>http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk