[OSM-talk] Please do not tag streets (yet).

Andy Robinson Andy_J_Robinson at blueyonder.co.uk
Mon Mar 13 15:08:55 GMT 2006

Tom Carden wrote:
>Sent: 13 March 2006 14:36
>To: talk at openstreetmap.org
>Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Please do not tag streets (yet).
>On 3/13/06, Immanuel Scholz <immanuel.scholz at gmx.de> wrote:
>> Hi everyone.
>> I want to ask you whether you could currently wait with tagging massive
>> line segments with different properties (name, class etc.) which original
>> should belong to a street ("way") rather than to a line segment.
>I talked to Steve briefly about this at the weekend, and it's worth
>summarising my suggestion here.
>The applet and other clients should be built consistently around a
>streets/ways model, and concentrate on getting the workflow simple and
>Conversion from segments to streets should be a short-term focused
>activity (a new WikiProject?) and when it's done these tools should be
>phased out.  It shouldn't be possible to create segments that aren't
>part of a street.

So how do you create segments if you don't know what the way is? eg if you
edit some GPS data that someone else uploaded. Or would it just receive a
default empty way name?

>So, we're going to need tools and scripts to help us upgrade existing
>segment data to the new streets model.  Here are two processes which I
>think could be nearly automatic (supervised conversion, basically).
>Process 1:
>Look for segments with the same name and then merge the path between
>them into a street with the same tags.  If any segments in between
>have different tags, then preserve those tags on the segments.  If
>segments have the same tags as the street, remove those tags.
>Process 2:
>Look for a tagged segment and convert all the segments within that
>'block' into a street.  Then merge all connected block-streets with
>the same name into streets.  Again, any unusual tags on segments
>should be preserved, but tags which are already on the street should
>be removed.
>(A block is a collection of nodes/segments between two nodes with more
>than two segments attached.  There's probably a better definition but
>that's the best I can do right now).
>Any thoughts?

That's fine for segments with any sort of a tag but I have created thousands
of segments which currently have no tags whatsoever. So I don't see any easy
way to convert these to individual ways unless it's done manually.

>talk mailing list
>talk at openstreetmap.org

Andy Robinson
Andy_J_Robinson at blueyonder.co.uk

More information about the talk mailing list