ref discussion/poll

πρέπει να συμφωνήσουμε σε ένα σύστημα χρήσης των ref, nat_ref, old_ref, reg_ref

η πρότασή μου είναι η εξής:
ref - αρίθμηση που υποδεικνύεται από πινακίδες επί του εδάφους
nat_ref - επίσημη αρίθμηση με βάση το έγγραφο του ΕΣΥΕ (1998) για τις εθνικές οδούς και το ΦΕΚ 253/2015 για τους αυτοκινητόδρομους
old_ref - επίσημη αρίθμηση με βάση το ΦΕΚ του 1963 ή τμήματα εθνικών οδών που έχουν αντικατασταθεί
reg_ref - επίσημη αρίθμηση επαρχιακών οδών με βάση το ΦΕΚ του 1956

*πιστεύω είναι καλύτερα οι δευτερεύουσες εθνικές οδοί που είναι secondary να έχουν nat_ref
*νομίζω πως η παρουσία του προθέματος ΕΟ/ΕΠ είναι περιττή εφόσον υπάρχει η διάκριση μεταξύ nat_ref/reg_ref

we should agree on a scheme about ref, nat_ref, old_ref, reg_ref

here is my proposal:
ref - numbering present on signs on the ground
nat_ref - official numbering according to the registry of national highways of 1998 and government gazzette 253/2015
old_ref - official numbering according to the decision about national highways of 1963
reg_ref - official numbering of provincial roads according to the decision about provincial roads of 1956

*i believe is better for minor national highways which are secondary to have nat_ref
*i think the presence of prefix ΕΟ/ΕΠ is not essential as there the distinction between nat_ref/reg_ref

Παρακαλώ να υπάρχει κόσμια συμπεριφορά και απαντήσεις με επιχειρήματα

Please let me clarify this issue.

There is an ongoing debate about usage of tag nat_ref.

JayCBR states that ref tag should be used (for official numbering) only if there is a sign on the ground (road). Otherwise it should not be used at all. (exception: motorways)

I state that ref tag should be used (for any official numbering) either there is a sign on the ground or not. (aka always).
The problem is when we are not using the ref tag at all, then we see a bad result on rendering softwares. The result is that official numbering disappears. (nat_ref tag is not rendering)

I think that rendering of our official numbering system is a primary issue. And as far I can see, other OSM communities (Germany, UK etc) are registering their official numbering system in the ref tag even on tertiary roads without any signing.

Therefore i totally disagree with usage of nat_ref only, for official numbering. Official numbering must and should go (primary) in the ref tag.

And when i say Official Numbering i mean any of our official documents ( of 1956, 1963 or 1998).
I don’t care what numbering system will go in nat_ref. old_ref or reg_ref. That is a secondary issue to me. Rendering of official numbering (any official numbering) is a primary issue to me.

I can’t accept a map without road numbers (any numbers!).

I want to write more but I think that it will be a disrespect of forum space and of our members.

SO, we must vote.

Voting System:

Question: Official numbering should primary go in:
1. nat_ref
2. ref
3. it depends

Please post your vote, preferably with your opinion.

Thank you.

ΥΓ. Αν κάποιος δεν νοιώθει άνετα να εκφραστεί στα Αγγλικά τότε μπορεί άνετα να εκφραστεί στα Ελληνκά. Εδώ είναι το δικό μας forum και έχουμε δικαίωμα να μιλάμε στην γλώσσα μας.

If anyone is watchng or following this topic and can’t understand Greek language, please feel free to declare it.

In my opinion, I prefer using “ref” only, as the 1963/1998 Greek road numbering and the Provincial road numberings is the only official road numbering system. Until last year, the road numbering system was the basis for classification system, with only a few exceptions (such as Hydra, where cars are banned). “old_ref” will be for roads that the bypasses have superseded them.

Question: Official numbering should primary go in…
Answer: #2 (ref)

I could go on and explain my reasoning in detail, but instead I will just quote one of Amaroussi’s earlier posts in another related thread with which I completely agree: “I still think nat_ref should just be ref since it’s currently the only road numbering system around”. In other words, regardless of it’s age or it’s state on the ground, we only have one official road numbering system for national and less important roads (ΕΠ), therefore this should always be used as ref - there’s no reason to overthink or over-complicate this.

Of course, in addition to the basic ref key, old_ref and/or int_ref should be used whenever it’s necessary to do so (but this is not what we are discussing here, I guess).

BTW, this “old” reference system is still in use by municipalities and people in local communities seem to be aware of the roads and their numbers. Here is a random example from an official document of the Municipality of Avdira:

Where is this officially classified primary road with the official reference number of 3 on the OSM map? Well, I don’t even know.
But there it is on an official document from 2014.

p.s. on an off-topic side-note, with even more digging on publically available documents you can discover which of these roads are actually primary, secondary or tertiary. Classification and reference numbers have nothing to do with the actual state of the road or the traffic, something which even the newer documents confirm.

I am appreciating your participation in this topic, but I think that this part of your message is irrelevant to what we are discussing here. I am saying that just because i want to be fair with everyone. (And i’m knowing what you are talking about.)

I vote for 2: ref

i dont have a problem for motorways/trunk/primary roads to have refs, i think is wrong for the rest…

about provincial road numbers: in everyday life nobody has ever used them, there is not a single sign…
they are only used by civil engineers, city planners and public works just like residential lot numbers, or agricultural field numbers
so its not essential info for a driver

I could argue that ref numbers are essential for at least one driver - me - but this would be a personal opinion and therefore it’s irrelevant. So, let’s assume for a moment that you are right and they are not not essential for any driver in the whole world. Even if that was absolutely true, it’s not a good enough reason to remove a valid ref from a highway or move it to another irrelevant key in order to effectively hide it.

OSM is not just about drivers: It’s for everyone. Indeed, most of us care mostly about the navigation aspect. But this is just one thing: People are mapping hike paths, the power grid, the national railway network and the bus lines, or even the benches and the recycle bins which could be find in their own neighborhood. And that’s the beauty of OSM. It also happens to be one of its core values: To quote their exact words:

So, yes. If ref numbers are used by civil engineers and city planners, let them have it. And believe me, it’s not just them. The official document which I’ve provided on my previous post is one example of using ref numbers in real life - and I still can’t find that road on OSM. In other words, even if their “essentiality” for drivers is open for discussion, having ref numbers on OSM is definitely not wrong.

As for tagging, using old_ref instead of ref, is just like using old_name instead of name: you can’t do that. There’s not a “new” ref to replace the old_ref. It might be old in age, but it’s not replaced by anything else and it’s still effectively in use. And since it’s the only one, there’s no reason to overthink or over-complicate this.

As for residential lot numbers (sorry for being off-topic) they might not be as useless as you think: a good real-life example is the mall of McArthurGlen Athens, which has Οικοδομικό Τετράγωνο Ε71 (Building Block E71) as its official address.

deleted

the problem with the mass edit is, that actual Old National Highways where in fact old_ref is undeniably the only solution and it would take much time to fix

i think we should do a revert and no further edits concerning refs, until an agreement is reached

if not, then we better erase all road refs and create them from scratch

I don’t think that is correct. In Germany we operate very much by the standard “verifiability” principle - if you cannot go there and look at the road number, then it shouldn’t be in the ref tag (because then if two mappers disagree, what would we do, call the government?).

It is just that not all our official ref numbers are printed in large letters on signposts; we also have maintenance labelling along the road in this form: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stationszeichen - these are of course valid inputs for a ref tag. But a road that has no road number signage or labelling at all would not normally get a ref tag.

Bye
Frederik

In the UK community there is a consensus that “The ref=* tag should only be used on roads which are signposted with a national official number… In all other cases, such as use of road numbers from highway authorities statutory lists, use either official_ref=* or admin_ref=*”

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_Tagging_Guidelines#Tagging_Road_Numbers

thank you!

That doesn’t change the fact that almost 90% of your roads have a ref tag. (I didn’t mention the reasoning behind that). EDIT: So, you are basically registering your official numbering system in the ref tag.
As a result, when someone looks at your maps, can directly see your numbering system at a glance just because the ref tag is rendering on almost every road. And I think that is important

But here in Greece almost 90% of our roads do not have any ref signposts at all (except motoways). So, imagine how Greek map will look like if we follow a consensus like yours.
That is why i think that our officoal numbering system should go in ref tags.
Of course, in case of roads that actually have signposts (there are few), then the signpost number should go in ref tag and official number in an other tag.

Thank you for your replies and welcome to our forum.
Nikos

a poll is on the way

Hi,

If we are to retain Old National Roads, may I present an idea that we simply mark them as a plain number, to reflect the mostly square-ish shield?

I have the feeling that using English language is preventing other members of our community to express their selves (in writing), even if they can read and understand English very well. Even for me, sometimes, is hard to wtite in English some of my complicated thoughts.

I’m also feeling that our member Amaroussi can read Greek very well but he doesn’t feel comfortable to write in Greek.
So i suggest that Amaroussi can continue writing in English but we will reply in Greek. (except if a reply is addressing directly to him).

Consequently i am switching to Greek language.

Λοιπόν για τα refs. Τελικά ο JayCBR είχε δίκιο για τα refs στις επαρχιακές οδούς.
Δεν έχουν κανένα νόημα, όπως δεν έχουν νόημα και τα επίσημα ονόματα τους στα ΦΕΚ, διότι και τα δυο αλλάζουν (ref και name) όταν η οδός περνάει από τον ένα Νομό στον άλλον.
Άρα οι επαρχιακές οδοί θα πρέπει να ονομάζονται με βάση τους προορισμούς τους, και δεν πρέπει να έχουν ref. Το reg_ref μάλλον είναι αποδεκτό αφού παραπέμπει σε τοπική αρίθμηση.

Άρα
Εθνικές Οδοί —> ref
Επαρχιακές Οδοί —> reg_ref
Παλ.Εθν.Οδοί —> old_ref EDIT:(αν συνυπάρχουν με τις Νέες Εθν.Οδούς)

Δεν βλέπω καμιά ανάγκη χρήσης του nat_ref.

το γεγονός της ξεχωριστής αρίθμησης σε κάθε νομό, ήταν από την αρχή το πρόβλημα με τις επαρχιακές οδούς και ο λόγος που πρότεινα το reg_ref, που πιστεύω είναι το ιδανικό (το loc_ref είναι για τοπικά συστήματα πχ αριθμοί οδών στην ΒΙΠΕ Σίνδου)

σχετικά με τις ΕΟ, δεν έχω πρόβλημα να έχουν ref, αρκεί να ανταποκρίνονται στην πραγματικότητα (όταν υπάρχουν αντιφάσεις μπορεί να χρσιμοποιηθεί συμπληρωματικά και το nat_ref)

έχω διαπιστώσει μετά από αρκετό ψάξιμο οτι τα γράμματα α,β,γ κτλ που προστέθηκαν στους αριθμούς ΕΟ, από το Μητρώο Εθνικών Οδών της ΕΣΥΕ, δεν χρησιμοποιούνται σε πινακίδες (εκτός της ΕΟ8α)

σύμφωνα με το έγγραφο της ΕΣΥΕ:
Παλαιά Εθνική Οδός 3 ref=ΕΟ3
Νέα Εθνική Οδός 3 ref=ΕΟ3α
παραλλαγές β,γ,δ ref=EO3γ

στην πραγματικότητα όμως:
Παλαιά Εθνική Οδός 3 old_ref=ΕΟ3
Νέα Εθνική Οδός 3 ref=ΕΟ3
παραλλαγές β,γ,δ no ref

Παραδείγματα αντιφάσεων:
-ΕΟ Θεσσαλονίκης - Κιλκίς (Λητή - Νέα Σάντα) ref=ΕΟ65β (ΕΣΥΕ), ref=EO65 (πραγματικότητα)
-ΕΟ Πτολεμαίδας - Φλώρινας (Πτολεμαίδα - Αμύνταιο): έχει αλλάξει η χάραξη της ΕΟ3 λόγω λατομείων, η παράκαμψη έχει ref=ΕΟ3β (ΕΣΥΕ), ενώ στην πραγματικότητα έχει ref=EO3 ή καθόλου

Side note: please refer to me in gender neutral (they/their), as I am not a male.

I do not intend to cause any offence to anyone by my use of English, because OSM is an international project, and I think that it is important for as many people as possible to understand our choices from Greece and all over the world. And yes, I still miss Greece. :frowning:

OSM is a global project, so let’s not spoil the discussion, just because of one’s ability or inability to speak a specific language.

Sorry, No offense meant.

Of course OSM is a global project, and everyone is welcome to participate in our Greek part of that project. (if he can read official documents in Greek, which i think you can).

But i insist that the forum language must be the native language (like every other forum), because of the reasons i mentioned before (in my previous post)
Anyway i think you can read Greek (am i right?), and you are free to write in English.

@JayCBR
Απο ότι έχω καταλάβει τα refs των εθνικών οδών (ΕΟxx) στην Ελλάδα αφορούν διαδρομές και όχι δρόμους, ίσως γι’αυτό δεν βάλανε και πινακίδες, διότι οι διαδρομές αλλάζουν συχνά.
Σαφώς η νέα χάραξη παίρνει το ref της παλιάς, καθώς σημαίνει οτι η διαδρομή έχει αλλάξει.
Η ΕΟ Θεσσαλονίκης - Κιλκίς (Λητή - Νέα Σάντα) σωστά έχει ref=EO65 καθως είναι η Νέα Εθνική Οδός 65. Άρα η κύρια διαδρομή είναι αυτή, και η παλιά είναι βοηθητική δηλ old_ref. (η ΟΚΧΕ την λέει ref=Ν.Ε.Ο.65 και την παλιά την λέει ref=Π.Ε.Ο.65).
Συμφωνούμε νομίζω.
Επίσης οι καταλήξεις α, β, γ, δ, ε κλπ χρειάζονται μόνο όταν αφορούν διακλαδώσεις. Αν αφορούν μέρος της βασικής διαδρομής δεν χρειάζονται.

Πχ η διαδρομη Θεσσαλονίκη - Αρναία - Ιερισσός ΕΟ16 εδώ είναι νέα χάραξη και γι’αυτό παίρνει το όνομα και το ref της παλιάς. Ομως η διακλάδωση προς Πολύγυρο εδώ έχει την κατάληξη α (ΦΕΚ 30Β/1996) αφού είναι διακλάδωση της νέας χάραξης. (άσχετα αν έχει πινακίδα ή όχι).
Εμείς εδώ στην Ελλάδα δεν μπορούμε να χαρτογραφήσουμε με βάση την ύπαρξη ή όχι πινακίδων που μπορεί να έβαλε ή να μήν έβαλε ο κάθε καρεκλοκένταυρος.

Λιγο off topic, αλλά πρέπει να το αναφέρω.
Ο δρόμος Χαλάστρα - Εύζωνοι έχει χαρακτηριστεί Αυτοκινητόδρομος απο το ΦΕΚ 666Β/2002.

Γιατί δεν τον έχουμε κάνει Αυτοκινητόδρομο ? Επίσης το κομμάτι της ΕΟ1 Χαλκηδόνα - κόμβος λιγο πρίν τον Αγ.Αθανάσιο θα πρέπει να έχει δύο ref tag αφου δεν θα υπάρχει πλεον το ΕΟ1 στον δρομο Χαλάστρα - Εύζωνοι.

@JayCBR Αν θες βάλε και αυτό το ΦΕΚ στην λίστα των εγγράφων

PS Για να γίνω πιό σαφής, για τις Εθνικές Οδους, το old_ref δικαιολογείται μόνο αν υπάρχει ταυτόχρονα νέα χάραξη με το ιδιο ref που αντικαθιστά την παλιά διαδρομή (δηλ ΠΕΟ και ΝΕΟ ταυτόχρονα), όπως στην περίπτωση που λέγαμε πριν, ΕΟ Θεσσαλονίκης - Κιλκίς (Λητή - Νέα Σάντα).
Αν η νέα χάραξη είναι αυτοκινητίδρομος πχ Α1 (όπου κατάργησε την Ν.Ε.Ο.1 άρα και το νεο ref EO1) δεν υπάρχει λόγος ύπαρξης του old_ref EO1 αφού δεν υπάρχει πλέον το νεο ref EO1 (αφού έγινε Α1).
Άρα η Παλαιά Εθνική Οδός 1 θα πρέπει να έχει ref ΕΟ1.