You are not logged in.

#26 2013-12-20 01:00:33

AlaskaDave
Member
From: Homer, Alaska ; Chiang Mai
Registered: 2013-09-21
Posts: 440
Website

Re: Defining classifications below trunk

Johnny Carlsen wrote:
Russ McD wrote:

Well it sounds like most of us agree (a) is the way to go ... a dot with no space.
And I do agree with Stephan that XX. can not be arbitrarily added, BUT can Johnny or Stephan at least take everything that currently has a province prefix, and convert it to the "nearly agreed upon"  XX.???? format.
.... At the very least, can you amend all of the ones I created if its still contentious ?
Russ

I have script ready that will update a little more than a thousand refs which were easy to recognize by the script - some incorrect entries may be missed, but I'd rather do scripted updates on too little than too much.

But before I run anything, I need to know that we can all agree on a format. I believe the current votes are as follows:

(a) Johnny Carlsen, Russ McD, stephankn, Paul_012
(b)
(c) AlaskaDave(?)
(d)
(e)

Sorry for the delay. I'm in Phitsanulok, where my GPS routing has found many errors LOL. I will go along with the rest of you as far as the format is concerned.

Last edited by AlaskaDave (2013-12-20 01:53:39)

Offline

#27 2013-12-28 04:22:41

AlaskaDave
Member
From: Homer, Alaska ; Chiang Mai
Registered: 2013-09-21
Posts: 440
Website

Re: Defining classifications below trunk

If we're all in agreement, let's update the Wiki accordingly: "Roads having a provincial prefix in their ref tags should be tagged as XX.nnnn where XX is the provincial prefix in Thai characters, followed by a dot, followed by the numerical portion of the ref. There should be no spaces in the ref value." This clarification could be added to the definition of highway=tertiary on the Thailand Wikiproject page at http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Thailand

Or words to that effect.

I can do the change if we're all okay with that wording. Suggestions, refinements anyone?

Offline

#28 2013-12-28 11:28:32

Johnny Carlsen
Member
From: Chiang Mai, Thailand
Registered: 2011-02-19
Posts: 134

Re: Defining classifications below trunk

AlaskaDave wrote:

If we're all in agreement, let's update the Wiki accordingly: "Roads having a provincial prefix in their ref tags should be tagged as XX.nnnn where XX is the provincial prefix in Thai characters, followed by a dot, followed by the numerical portion of the ref. There should be no spaces in the ref value." This clarification could be added to the definition of highway=tertiary on the Thailand Wikiproject page at http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Thailand

Or words to that effect.

I can do the change if we're all okay with that wording. Suggestions, refinements anyone?

Sounds good to me.

I have fixed more than a thousand roads now to follow the above standard.

Offline

#29 2013-12-28 14:04:06

RocketMan
Member
Registered: 2012-05-04
Posts: 249

Re: Defining classifications below trunk

Removed

Last edited by RocketMan (2015-06-29 11:00:27)

Offline

#30 2013-12-28 14:18:39

AlaskaDave
Member
From: Homer, Alaska ; Chiang Mai
Registered: 2013-09-21
Posts: 440
Website

Re: Defining classifications below trunk

I have updated the Wiki accordingly.

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Thailand

Offline

#31 2014-01-07 15:14:00

EndlessRoundabout
Member
Registered: 2013-11-27
Posts: 41

Re: Defining classifications below trunk

Johnny Carlsen wrote:
Russ McD wrote:

Well it sounds like most of us agree (a) is the way to go ... a dot with no space.
And I do agree with Stephan that XX. can not be arbitrarily added, BUT can Johnny or Stephan at least take everything that currently has a province prefix, and convert it to the "nearly agreed upon"  XX.???? format.
.... At the very least, can you amend all of the ones I created if its still contentious ?
Russ

I have script ready that will update a little more than a thousand refs which were easy to recognize by the script - some incorrect entries may be missed, but I'd rather do scripted updates on too little than too much.

But before I run anything, I need to know that we can all agree on a format. I believe the current votes are as follows:

(a) Johnny Carlsen, Russ McD, stephankn, Paul_012
(b)
(c) AlaskaDave
(d)
(e)

I'd also go with version a (if my vote counts.... ;-) )

Offline

#32 2014-01-07 18:24:33

Johnny Carlsen
Member
From: Chiang Mai, Thailand
Registered: 2011-02-19
Posts: 134

Re: Defining classifications below trunk

EndlessRoundabout wrote:
Johnny Carlsen wrote:
Russ McD wrote:

Well it sounds like most of us agree (a) is the way to go ... a dot with no space.
And I do agree with Stephan that XX. can not be arbitrarily added, BUT can Johnny or Stephan at least take everything that currently has a province prefix, and convert it to the "nearly agreed upon"  XX.???? format.
.... At the very least, can you amend all of the ones I created if its still contentious ?
Russ

I have script ready that will update a little more than a thousand refs which were easy to recognize by the script - some incorrect entries may be missed, but I'd rather do scripted updates on too little than too much.

But before I run anything, I need to know that we can all agree on a format. I believe the current votes are as follows:

(a) Johnny Carlsen, Russ McD, stephankn, Paul_012
(b)
(c) AlaskaDave
(d)
(e)

I'd also go with version a (if my vote counts.... ;-) )

I have done a scripted update on most roads to follow version (a), xx.1234 -- most roads should now be correct.

Offline

#33 2014-01-08 02:17:15

AlaskaDave
Member
From: Homer, Alaska ; Chiang Mai
Registered: 2013-09-21
Posts: 440
Website

Re: Defining classifications below trunk

Johnny Carlsen wrote:

I have done a scripted update on most roads to follow version (a), xx.1234 -- most roads should now be correct.

Johnny, I would like to see that script just for my own amusement and edification. I don't know if it's something that's easily shareable or not but as a former database junkie, I'd love to dig into the details of "talking" to the OSM database.

And thanks very much for your work on this project.

Dave

Offline

#34 2014-02-10 10:23:12

AlaskaDave
Member
From: Homer, Alaska ; Chiang Mai
Registered: 2013-09-21
Posts: 440
Website

Re: Defining classifications below trunk

Now that we have the naming convention out of the way, is there any interest in working toward a solution to the small soi classification problem discussed in the living_street thread at http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=19316?  (I posted in this thread because IMO it is a more appropriate place for this discussion to continue.) Generally speaking, I object to the use of highway=living_street as well as highway=path for those narrow, paved residential sois that are common in many areas that I visit and would like to come up with a scheme that works better for Thailand and the rest of the OSM community.

I am willing to take our comments and a description of the issue to the tagging list, unless anyone has objections.

Suggestions, objections? Interested or not?

Last edited by AlaskaDave (2014-02-10 10:24:45)

Offline

#35 2014-02-10 10:30:57

Johnny Carlsen
Member
From: Chiang Mai, Thailand
Registered: 2011-02-19
Posts: 134

Re: Defining classifications below trunk

AlaskaDave wrote:

Now that we have the naming convention out of the way, is there any interest in working toward a solution to the small soi classification problem discussed in the living_street thread at http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=19316?  (I posted in this thread because IMO it is a more appropriate place for this discussion to continue.) Generally speaking, I object to the use of highway=living_street as well as highway=path for those narrow, paved residential sois that are common in many areas that I visit and would like to come up with a scheme that works better for Thailand and the rest of the OSM community.

I am willing to take our comments and a description of the issue to the tagging list, unless anyone has objections.

Suggestions, objections? Interested or not?

Can you show one or more pictures of these soi's, this will help me suggest better tags.

You can probably find some of these places on Google Streetview if you don't have pictures available.

Offline

#36 2014-02-10 10:55:26

AlaskaDave
Member
From: Homer, Alaska ; Chiang Mai
Registered: 2013-09-21
Posts: 440
Website

Re: Defining classifications below trunk

Johnny Carlsen wrote:

Can you show one or more pictures of these soi's, this will help me suggest better tags.

You can probably find some of these places on Google Streetview if you don't have pictures available.

There are some photos and some proposed tagging by user:westnorost on the thread I included but you must be familiar with the type of soi I'm referring to. Small, too narrow for cars or trucks, but paved and lined with houses. They are residential streets that people have been tagging with highway=service and service =alley as well as the tags I mentioned.

Offline

#37 2014-02-16 13:34:37

Paul_012
Member
Registered: 2011-08-05
Posts: 211

Re: Defining classifications below trunk

I think it's better to keep conversation in one place. Perhaps this could be split into a new thread of its own, since we're branching into a new specific topic anyway.

Offline

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB