[OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq

Richard Fairhurst richard at systemed.net
Wed Feb 3 11:02:27 GMT 2010

Tobias Knerr wrote:
> IMHO, the argument is perfectly valid. The problem with highway=
> cycleway and pedestrians isn't that adding a foot=no would be 
> too much effort. The problem is that some people, while they 
> wouldn't mind adding it, don't know that they need to add it in the 
> first place. Therefore, the number of tags isn't the issue here, but 
> rather whether the tags are prone to misinterpretation.

I can happily assure you your fears are groundless.

In the UK, our major routes are classed as "trunk roads", "primary A roads",
and "non-primary A roads".

You might recognise a few of these words. Not so fast. In fact, these map to
OSM tags as follows:

     "trunk road" -> highway=trunk (and, optional, operator=Highways Agency)
     "primary A road" -> highway=trunk
     "non-primary A road" -> highway=primary

Yes, you did read that right. UK _non-primary_ A roads are tagged as

That is 300 times more open to misinterpretation than the cycleway example.
Yet we cope. In fact we cope very well: pretty much all these roads are now
mapped, and tagged correctly. On rare occasions we need to point a newbie in
the right place, but because we've documented it and been consistent in how
we use it on the map, 99% of the time they just get it.

I'm sure you super-efficient German guys could do an even better job of
educating people about the highway=cycleway tag than we do about

View this message in context: http://n2.nabble.com/Fwd-Nav4All-navigation-shut-down-by-Navteq-tp4488024p4506571.html
Sent from the General Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

More information about the talk mailing list