[OSM-talk] Mapping Mottram and Tintwistle proposed bypass

[Peter Miller]

Excellent. Thanks Steve.

So how should a proposed road be tagged? Should it be highway=proposed
Proposed=trunk Name=foo bypass?


Peter

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Steve Chilton [mailto:S.L.Chilton at mdx.ac.uk]
> Sent: 31 March 2008 20:53
> To: Dave Stubbs; Peter Miller
> Cc: Talk Openstreetmap
> Subject: RE: [OSM-talk] Mapping Mottram and Tintwistle proposed bypass
> 
> In an attempt to avoid this kind of "false tagging for rendering" I have a
> submitted an addition to the mapnik style tonight.
> It will render highway=construction or highway=proposed from z12 upwards.
> It will also render a text label (based on name=) for z13 upwards.
> Jamie's more sophisticated suggestions make sense but are not easily to
> render at the moment. Perhaps we can work towards that time-based approach
> later.
> For now it would make a lot of sense for people to revisit roads under
> construction they have tagged and follow this suggested scheme:
> highway=construction
> construction=foo (motorway, trunk, primary or whatever - if known)
> name=Foo bypass, due to open Dec 08 (or whatever)
> 
> PS: I haven't looked at the file but hope this doesn't throw osmarender
> rules out, which I know picks something up to render construction
> 
> Cheers
> STEVE
> 
> 	-----Original Message-----
> 	From: talk-bounces at openstreetmap.org on behalf of Dave Stubbs
> 	Sent: Mon 3/31/2008 6:03 PM
> 	To: Peter Miller
> 	Cc: Talk Openstreetmap
> 	Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Mapping Mottram and Tintwistle proposed
> bypass
> 
> 
> 
> 	On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 10:08 PM, Peter Miller
> 	<peter.miller at itoworld.com> wrote:
> 	>
> 	>  Thanks for that Robert. A few other questions:
> 	>
> 	>  1) How does one tag something that is being considered seriously
> (such as
> 	>  the Mottram Tintwistle bypass), but which may well never get
> built? I think
> 	>  I will just put the estimated build date given by the highways
> agency for
> 	>  now. (I will also continue to use the tunnel trick to get it to
> render in
> 	>  the mean time).
> 
> 
> 	By "tunnel trick" I presume that you mean tag it as a tunnel so that
> 	it turns up dotted, despite not being a tunnel, nor ever will be a
> 	tunnel?
> 
> 	That's not a trick, that's a dirty, dirty hack and should be stomped
> on hard.
> 
> 	If you want proposed roads to show up dotted then fix the renderer,
> 	don't engage in phantom tagging.
> 
> 	_______________________________________________
> 	talk mailing list
> 	talk at openstreetmap.org
> 	http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
>