[OSM-talk] Highway=trunk : harmonization between countries ?

Fri Feb 23 17:06:42 UTC 2018

+1

Administrative classification is not strictly related everywhere to
signage, structure and access rights.

On Fri, Feb 23, 2018 at 1:12 PM, djakk djakk <djakk.djakk at gmail.com> wrote:
> I know that « trunk »  is country-dependent but why not moving it to a
> worldwide definition ? Administrative classification could be moved to other
> tags :)
>
>
> djakk
>
> Le ven. 23 févr. 2018 à 16:06, Matej Lieskovský <lieskovsky.matej at gmail.com>
> a écrit :
>>
>> Greetings
>> I'd like to caution against using this system globally. In Czechia, roads
>> are formally classified into classes, which influence signage, ref numbers
>> and so on. Deploying this system here would make the tag confusing/useless
>> and would likely face enormous backlash. I have no problems with using this
>> system in countries without a clearly defined road classification, but
>> please don't touch the countries where there is no doubt about what class
>> any given road is.
>> Happy mapping!
>>
>> On 22 February 2018 at 16:20, djakk djakk <djakk.djakk at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> I totally agree with you, the definition you provide,
>>> administrative-free, tends to the same osm map between countries.
>>>
>>> djakk
>>>
>>> Le jeu. 15 févr. 2018 à 19:18, Fernando Trebien
>>> <fernando.trebien at gmail.com> a écrit :
>>>>
>>>> Landing on this discussion several months late. I've just heard of it
>>>> by reading a wiki talk page [1].
>>>>
>>>> Since 13 February 2009, the wiki [2] criticises highway classification
>>>> as problematic/unverifiable. This has also been subject to a lot of
>>>> controversy (and edit wars) in my local community (Brazil), especially
>>>> regarding the effect of (lack of) pavement.
>>>>
>>>> In trying to achieve greater consensus some years ago, I decided to
>>>> seek opinions elsewhere and finally I arrived at this scheme [3] which
>>>> I think is very useful, if not perfect yet. It can be easily
>>>> summarised like this:
>>>> - trunk: best routes between large/important cities
>>>> - primary: best routes between cities and above
>>>> - secondary: best routes between towns/suburbs and above
>>>> - tertiary: best routes between villages/neighbourhoods and above
>>>> - unclassified: best routes between other place=* and above
>>>>
>>>> For example, the best route between two villages would be at least
>>>> tertiary. So would be the best route between a village and a town or a
>>>> city. Parts of this route might have a higher class in case they are
>>>> part of a route between more important places.
>>>>
>>>> It surely raises the problem of determining optimal routes. Maybe a
>>>> sensible criterion would be average travel time without traffic
>>>> congestion. A number of vehicles may be selected for this average -
>>>> could be motorcycle+car+bus+truck, or simply car+truck.
>>>>
>>>> Early results in my area [4, in Portuguese] seem promising and have
>>>> produced more consensus than any previous proposals. To me, this
>>>> method seems to:
>>>> - resist alternations in classification along the same road
>>>> - work across borders (where classification discontinuities are
>>>> expected because each country is using different classification
>>>> criteria)
>>>> - account for road network topology
>>>> - work in countries with mostly precarious/unpaved roads or
>>>> without/unknown official highway classes
>>>> - work between settlements as well as within settlements
>>>>
>>>> Borderline cases are probably inescapable in any system that does not
>>>> use solely criteria that are directly verifiable - from the ground, or
>>>> from the law. Maybe, in certain developed countries, the system is so
>>>> well organized that merely checking signs/laws is sufficient. That
>>>> does not mean it is like that everywhere on the planet.
>>>>
>>>> OSM has so far received a lot of input from communities in developed
>>>> countries (mostly Europe, North America and Australia) and hasn't
>>>> given much attention to less developed/organized countries. What comes
>>>> closest to this is what the HOT Team does, but the judgment of road
>>>> classification one can do from satellite images in a foreign country
>>>> is much more limited than the criteria that have been raised in this
>>>> thread so far.
>>>>
>>>> I wouldn't endorse tags such as maxspeed:practical due to lack of
>>>> verifiability (it should be obvious that different types of vehicles
>>>> would achieve different practical speeds). It is better to use the
>>>> legal speed in maxspeed=* and describe the practical reason for a
>>>> lower speed using surface=*, smoothness=*, and, who knows, maybe the
>>>> not yet approved hazard=* [5] (though that is intended for signed
>>>> hazards, not subjective/opinionated hazards).
>>>>
>>>> For the sake of long-term sanity, I also wouldn't mix the purpose of
>>>> one tag with the purpose of other tags. To describe the surface, there
>>>> is surface=*, smoothness=* and tracktype=*. To describe access rights,
>>>> there is access=*, foot=*, bicycle=*, motor_vehicle=*, etc. To
>>>> describe legal speed, maxspeed=*. To describe curves, there's
>>>> geometry.
>>>>
>>>> Purpose, perhaps, is the main issue. What is the purpose of highway
>>>> classification? Is it to save us the work of adding extra tags? Is it
>>>> to allow the renderer to produce a cleaner output at low zoom levels?
>>>> Is it to allow routers to assume default speeds? Maybe to guide their
>>>> routing heuristics? Is it to express some sort of importance? If so,
>>>> by which perspective - urbanistic, traffic engineering, movement,
>>>> commercial value, cultural/fame, historic, some combination of those?
>>>> Should the purpose be the same in every country?
>>>>
>>>> It may be interesting to also discuss the classification adopted by
>>>> other maps. I don't have a reference for Google (originally TeleAtlas)
>>>> or Here.com (originally Navteq), but Waze publishes its per-country
>>>> road classification criteria in its wiki. [6-16]
>>>>
>>>> [1]
>>>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Tag:highway%3Dtrunk#change_.22high_performance.22_to_.22high_importance.22
>>>> [2] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Verifiability#Problematic_tags
>>>> [3]
>>>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Ftrebien/Drafts/Generic_highway_classification_principles#Schematic_diagram_and_general_comments
>>>> [4] https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=674296#p674296
>>>> [5] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/hazard
>>>> [6] https://wazeopedia.waze.com/wiki/USA/Road_types
>>>> [7] https://wazeopedia.waze.com/wiki/UnitedKingdom/Roads#Road_types
>>>> [8] https://wazeopedia.waze.com/wiki/Canada/Main_Page#Road_Types
>>>> [9] https://wazeopedia.waze.com/wiki/Commons/Road_Types/India
>>>> [10]
>>>> https://wazeopedia.waze.com/wiki/Brazil/Como_categorizar_e_nomear_vias
>>>> [11]
>>>> https://wazeopedia.waze.com/wiki/Germany/Kartenlegende_(Deutschland)
>>>> [12] https://wazeopedia.waze.com/wiki/France/Classification_France
>>>> [13] https://wazeopedia.waze.com/wiki/Italy/Tipologia_delle_strade
>>>> [14] https://wazeopedia.waze.com/wiki/Indonesia/Panduan_Tipe_Jalan
>>>> [15] https://wiki.waze.com/wiki/%E9%81%93%E8%B7%AF%E7%B1%BB%E5%9E%8B
>>>> [16]
>>>> https://wiki.waze.com/wiki/%E3%80%8C%E9%81%93%E8%B7%AF%E7%A8%AE%E5%88%A5%E3%80%8D
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Fernando Trebien
>>>> +55 (51) 99962-5409
>>>>
>>>> "Nullius in verba."
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> talk mailing list
>>>> talk at openstreetmap.org
>>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> talk mailing list
>>> talk at openstreetmap.org
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> talk mailing list
> talk at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>

-- 
Fernando Trebien
+55 (51) 9962-5409

"Nullius in verba."