Re: [Tagging] Clarification unclassified vs residential

Whoa, What happened to the original topic of this thread? We were trying to come up with a system of determining whether a highway is classified or residential. Now we're talking about traffic density and traffic speed, and some sort of numerical classification scheme for motorways, etc. What's g

Re: [Tagging] Clarification unclassified vs residential

On Tue, 26 Feb 2019 at 05:28, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > Is ther a UK page that has these official classifications? They maybe of > use to fit others classifications to. > There is such a page. It probably won't help. It confuses me and I live here. :) https://assets.publishing.ser

Re: [Tagging] Clarification unclassified vs residential

On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 6:11 PM Andy Townsend wrote: > It's a noble aim, but unfortunately the first thing that springs to mind > is https://xkcd.com/927/ :) Funny old one, though a bit sarcastic. Many standards we have today have emerged from competing standards, and that's true from data protoc

Re: [Tagging] Clarification unclassified vs residential

On Tue, 26 Feb 2019 at 12:17, Fernando Trebien wrote: > > I don't think a uniform, worldwide highway class standardisation based > on road attributes is possible and satisfactory. But I think a > functional one would be, at least as a guiding principle. > What we currently have doesn't reflect r

Re: [Tagging] Clarification unclassified vs residential

On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 9:00 PM Sergio Manzi wrote: > > +1 here too, and a little bit of the same concerns expressed by Andy > (https://xkcd.com/927/) > > BTW, in the Italian mailing list there is currently a thread discussing if > and how we should tag highways according to what are the officia

Re: [Tagging] Clarification unclassified vs residential

On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 9:40 AM Paul Allen wrote: > > On Tue, 26 Feb 2019 at 12:17, Fernando Trebien > wrote: >> >> >> I don't think a uniform, worldwide highway class standardisation based >> on road attributes is possible and satisfactory. But I think a >> functional one would be, at least as

Re: [Tagging] Clarification unclassified vs residential

On 26/02/2019 09:58, Dave Swarthout wrote: Whoa, What happened to the original topic of this thread? We were trying to come up with a system of determining whether a highway is classified or residential. Now we're talking about traffic density and traffic speed, and some sort of numerical cla

Re: [Tagging] Clarification unclassified vs residential

On 2019-02-26 14:13, Andy Townsend wrote: > On 26/02/2019 09:58, Dave Swarthout wrote: >> Whoa, >> >> What happened to the original topic of this thread? We were trying to come >> up with a system of determining whether a highway is classified or >> residential. Now we're talking about traffic de

Re: [Tagging] Clarification unclassified vs residential

Honestly couldn't hurt the cycleways to have a better model than just path and cycleway, since some networks can get quite complex (consider quietways and cycle superhighways; or the multitiered systems in The Netherlands, for example). On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 6:39 AM Paul Allen wrote: > On Tue,

Re: [Tagging] Clarification unclassified vs residential

On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 7:01 AM Dave Swarthout wrote: > > Whoa, > > What happened to the original topic of this thread? We were trying to come up > with a system of determining whether a highway is classified or residential. > Now we're talking about traffic density and traffic speed, and some s

Re: [Tagging] Clarification unclassified vs residential

... and not only cycleways: have a look here, where I live: https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=15/45.4364/12.3334 All are "highway=pedestrian", at the same level, but believe me: they are not! Sergio On 2019-02-26 14:30, Paul Johnson wrote: > Honestly couldn't hurt the cycleways to have a bett

Re: [Tagging] Clarification unclassified vs residential

Only as a philosophical detour: sounds like the sort of difference between highway=footway and highway=pedestrian. It deserves its own topic I think. On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 10:32 AM Paul Johnson wrote: > > Honestly couldn't hurt the cycleways to have a better model than just path > and cycleway

Re: [Tagging] Clarification unclassified vs residential

Am Di., 26. Feb. 2019 um 13:40 Uhr schrieb Paul Allen : > On Tue, 26 Feb 2019 at 12:17, Fernando Trebien > wrote: > >> >> I don't think a uniform, worldwide highway class standardisation based >> on road attributes is possible and satisfactory. But I think a >> functional one would be, at least a

Re: [Tagging] Clarification unclassified vs residential

Am Di., 26. Feb. 2019 um 13:52 Uhr schrieb Fernando Trebien < fernando.treb...@gmail.com>: > On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 9:00 PM Sergio Manzi wrote: > I think the official categories in Codice della Strada should probably > be assigned to OSM's classes by closely matching the descriptions in > the wi

Re: [Tagging] Clarification unclassified vs residential

Am Di., 26. Feb. 2019 um 14:40 Uhr schrieb Sergio Manzi : > ... and not only cycleways: have a look here, where I live: > https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=15/45.4364/12.3334 > > All are "highway=pedestrian", at the same level, but believe me: they are > not! Venice is a globally unique (or m

Re: [Tagging] Clarification unclassified vs residential

I believe you, I've spent a week there one year ago. As a map user I would prefer to have the safe passages during acqua alta [1] somehow highlighted, or at least the main pedestrian routes between the main plazas, and I think many of the narrower alleys (some are narrower than the width of a car)

Re: [Tagging] Clarification unclassified vs residential

On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 11:20 AM Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > Am Di., 26. Feb. 2019 um 13:52 Uhr schrieb Fernando Trebien > : >> >> On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 9:00 PM Sergio Manzi wrote: >> I think the official categories in Codice della Strada should probably >> be assigned to OSM's classes by c

Re: [Tagging] Clarification unclassified vs residential

On 2019-02-26 15:19, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > > Am Di., 26. Feb. 2019 um 13:52 Uhr schrieb Fernando Trebien > mailto:fernando.treb...@gmail.com>>: > > On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 9:00 PM Sergio Manzi > wrote: > I think the official categories in Codice della Strada s

Re: [Tagging] Clarification unclassified vs residential

Venice situation is unusual but not unique and in other contexts different tagging schemes have been used, not limited by the footway/pedestrian alternative. As an example see how this road in Mackinac Island (/no motor vehicles there.../) is tagged: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/17874338

Re: [Tagging] Clarification unclassified vs residential

Exactly! And in Venice there is an official designation of roads accordingly to their availability in case of exceptional high tides ("/Acqua alta/") of different heights, but AFAIK this essential information is not registered anywhere in OSM... Are you a Venetian too, Fernando? Cheers, Sergi

Re: [Tagging] Clarification unclassified vs residential

P.S. a note to Andy Townsend: We are not at "/the price of fish/" yet, but we're rapidly closing in...    :-) On 2019-02-26 19:19, Sergio Manzi wrote: > > Exactly! And in Venice there is an official designation of roads accordingly > to their availability in case of exceptional high tides ("/Acq

Re: [Tagging] Clarification unclassified vs residential

On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 3:09 PM Sergio Manzi wrote: > > Venice situation is unusual but not unique and in other contexts different > tagging schemes have been used, not limited by the footway/pedestrian > alternative. > > As an example see how this road in Mackinac Island (no motor vehicles > t

Re: [Tagging] Clarification unclassified vs residential

Am Di., 26. Feb. 2019 um 19:09 Uhr schrieb Sergio Manzi : > Venice situation is unusual but not unique and in other contexts different > tagging schemes have been used, not limited by the footway/pedestrian > alternative. > > As an example see how this road in Mackinac Island (*no motor vehicles >

Re: [Tagging] Clarification unclassified vs residential

That actually looks pretty correct. It's a state highway and emergency vehicles are allowed to travel on it, so emergency=yes would be appropriate as well. ref=MI 185 would be better, since US references are XX YYY where XX is the state postal abbreviation (NOT SH, SR, K, M or whatever), but sour

Re: [Tagging] Clarification unclassified vs residential

On Thu, 21 Feb 2019 17:52:19 -0300 Fernando Trebien wrote: > On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 3:46 AM Mark Wagner > wrote: > > When you did your query for hamlets, I'm afraid you ran headlong > > into a quirk of American political geography. Historically, the > > postal service would only deliver mail t