[OSM-talk] Misclassified roads

Alex Wilson alex_wilson at pobox.com
Thu Jul 10 08:44:23 BST 2008


Perhaps a compromise would be to add a new tag: something like
'needs_review=true'. After a revisit of the road, the tag can be removed and
the road classification left as is or modified as appropriate.

Cheers,

Alex

2008/7/10 David Ebling <dave_ebling at yahoo.co.uk>:

> Steve, I would suggest you reconsider doing this.
>
> I would strongly support the use of highway=road for new roads that no
> information is available for, eg from a trace that was done with a car but
> no notes were made.
>
> However, by retagging "unclassified" to "road" you are essentially deleting
> information from the database that you don't know to be incorrect. Sure, if
> you know the classification is correct, change it, but don't just delete it
> - it could be correct.
>
> For what it's worth, I work on the following basis for UK road
> classifications:
> * trunk/primary/secondary - as signed.
> * tertiary - other roads that predominantly have a white line of some sort
> down the centre. These tend to be wider roads used by more traffic. I
> believe OS maps use a similar distinction, and I think it's useful for
> planning routes, both with a map or automatically.
> * unclassified - roads without a centre line. If they are too narrow for
> passing, I add lanes=1.
>
> On this basis I have mapped a great number of unclassified roads. It would
> be a real shame if you deleted this information that I had carefully
> collected.
>
> I accept that there are a large number of incorrectly tagged roads out
> there, but correct them, don't delete info on the offchance.
>
> Regards,
>
> David
>
> > Message: 2
> > Date: Wed, 9 Jul 2008 15:36:03 +0100 (BST)
> > From: Steve Hill <steve at nexusuk.org>
> > Subject: [OSM-talk] Misclassified roads
> > To: talk at openstreetmap.org
> > Message-ID:
> >       <alpine.LRH.1.10.0807091519190.26751 at persephone.nexusuk.org>
> > Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; format=flowed; charset=US-ASCII
> >
> >
> > Following the approval of the highway=road tag, I've
> > set about
> > aggressively changing a lot of the highway=unclassified
> > roads around
> > Swansea, that I believe are misclassified, to highway=road,
> > with the
> > intention that they can then be surveyed and reclassified
> > correctly.
> >
> > However, after starting to do this, I've realised just
> > how many of the
> > roads are misclassified - I'd estimate that well over
> > 80% of the roads
> > tagged as highway=unclassified are, infact, not
> > unclassified roads.  So
> > I'm wondering about the merits of changing *all* the
> > highway=unclassified roads in the area to highway=road so
> > that the whole
> > lot can be classified appropriately from scratch.  This
> > would make it
> > obvious which roads really are unclassified and which need
> > to be checked.
> >
> > What are peoples' views on this?  I imagine that much
> > of the OSM world is
> > affected in the same way, and this renders the
> > highway=unclassified tag
> > relatively meaningless in it's current state.  Should
> > there be a global
> > reclassification to fix this, or is there a better way?
> >
> >   - Steve
> >     xmpp:steve at nexusuk.org <xmpp%3Asteve at nexusuk.org>
> sip:steve at nexusuk.org <sip%3Asteve at nexusuk.org>
> > http://www.nexusuk.org/
>
>
>      __________________________________________________________
> Not happy with your email address?.
> Get the one you really want - millions of new email addresses available now
> at Yahoo! http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/ymail/new.html
>
> _______________________________________________
> talk mailing list
> talk at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20080710/699a3e30/attachment.html>


More information about the talk mailing list