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

Matej Lieskovský lieskovsky.matej at gmail.com
Fri Feb 23 19:43:48 UTC 2018


Could we perhaps start a wiki page to collect information on how every
country classifies roads? Something like
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Highway:International_equivalence but
intended for the global community instead of the local mappers? More detail
and less non-english text.

On 23 February 2018 at 20:11, Fernando Trebien <fernando.trebien at gmail.com>
wrote:

> I'm glad it is not so much of a problem in Czechia and I hope it would
> rarely be a problem anywhere.
>
> In any case, the idea can be developed further. Matej raises some
> interesting points that can account for better classification. For
> example, we could add some bias towards regional and/or national
> routes, in order to avoid shortcuts (though not forbid them completely
> if they are significant); likewise, we could add some bias to
> infrastructure, such as pavement quality, signage quality, feasibility
> for large vehicles (such as trucks), etc.
>
> Most interesting I think is to share with the global community how the
> local community understands classification. Are access rights really
> important to the map user, or is it only important to mappers? If so,
> why can't the renderer parse access tags to decide how to represent
> the way? (I believe that was the intention when motorroad=* was
> proposed.)
>
> On Fri, Feb 23, 2018 at 3:29 PM, djakk djakk <djakk.djakk at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Don’t worry, when the official system is good, lik in Czechia, it matches
> > Fernando’s suggestion :)
> >
> > djakk
> >
> >
> > Le ven. 23 févr. 2018 à 18:32, Matej Lieskovský <
> lieskovsky.matej at gmail.com>
> > a écrit :
> >>
> >> Don't get me wrong, this system might work well for countries without an
> >> official system, but what do you expect to happen in the EU?
> >> Will we have "highway=primary" + "class=tertiary" because some random
> road
> >> happens to be a shortcut? Or do you expect us in Czechia to use
> "class=II"
> >> while germans use "class=S" so that it actually matches the signage?
> Will
> >> the renderer parse ref numbers (and ignore the main tag) or will we
> receive
> >> hundreds of complaints about some section of the road having (what every
> >> local resident will consider to be) the wrong class?
> >>
> >> How do you determine "important cities" when even the line between towns
> >> and cities is country-dependant? Or is using administrative differences
> only
> >> not OK for roads?
> >>
> >> Even Waze actually follows local administration.
> >>
> >>
> >> Long story short: I am strongly against deploying this system in
> countries
> >> with a functioning official classification system.
> >>
> >> On 23 February 2018 at 18:06, Fernando Trebien
> >> <fernando.trebien at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> +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."
> >>
> >>
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Fernando Trebien
> +55 (51) 9962-5409
>
> "Nullius in verba."
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20180223/af9bd3c5/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the talk mailing list