OpenStreetMap Forum

The Free Wiki World Map

You are not logged in.

Announcement

A fix has been applied to the login system for the forums - if you have trouble logging in please contact support@openstreetmap.org with both your forum username and your OpenStreetMap username so we can make sure your accounts are properly linked.

#26 2018-01-26 12:50:03

ftrebien
Inactive
From: Porto Alegre, Brazil
Registered: 2013-05-18
Posts: 772

Re: Cobblestones vs setts vs paving stones

SK53 wrote:

your example of paving stones looks awfully like brick/block pavers to me

Block pavers and bricks would be mapped as paving_stones in OSM, so I added this information to the wiki.

I think that flagstones would be mapped as paving_stones too. What do you think?

Last edited by ftrebien (2018-01-26 12:53:44)

Offline

#27 2018-01-26 14:40:30

SK53
Member
Registered: 2009-01-11
Posts: 322

Re: Cobblestones vs setts vs paving stones

I could have sworn I'd used a brick or block paver tag value in the past. Seriously they do need to be separated out from paving stones: they are a very common highway surface on service roads & lightly used parts of residential streets.

Flagstones on the other hand clearly are paving stones. I presume they are the original paving stone.

Offline

#28 2018-01-26 14:53:51

hadw
Member
Registered: 2014-09-02
Posts: 826

Re: Cobblestones vs setts vs paving stones

+1 for block pavers  not being "paving stones".

Offline

#29 2018-01-26 17:15:15

ftrebien
Inactive
From: Porto Alegre, Brazil
Registered: 2013-05-18
Posts: 772

Re: Cobblestones vs setts vs paving stones

Some people have used the somewhat rare "bricks" and "brick" values. No other value currently used seems to refer to block pavers.

Could it be that you want it separated from paving_stones because of the differences (such as slipperiness) between natural stones and artificial blocks? Or would there be another reason? Would there be cases, such as artificial blocks made to resemble natural stones, that would confuse mappers?

Would block pavers and bricks need to be separated as well? For what reason?

The surface tag is a little bit problematic because it is, by definition, an "open set" (it can have really MANY values). For data consumers (applications), it is better to keep the number of values tractably low. For users in general, it is better if apps can make use of mappers' work.

Last edited by ftrebien (2018-01-26 17:17:37)

Offline

#30 2018-01-26 22:55:27

hadw
Member
Registered: 2014-09-02
Posts: 826

Re: Cobblestones vs setts vs paving stones

Paving stones, as the term is used in England, are concrete.  The key thing that distinguishes them from block paves is size.  They are large enough for vehicles to create sufficient shearing moments to break them.

Last edited by hadw (2018-01-26 22:56:24)

Offline

#31 2018-02-01 22:02:23

westnordost
Member
From: Hamburg
Registered: 2013-07-13
Posts: 175

Re: Cobblestones vs setts vs paving stones

Err, back to the cobblestone topic:

Perhaps it's worth looking at an example of what I'd consider a successful transition: The subdivision of "farm" into "farmland" and "farmyard". What made it work, imo, was that there were two new terms. This meant that landuse=farm wasn't instantly wrong – merely imprecise – and that you could see which tags were following the new definition and which ones were left over from before the change and needed a revisit.

Based on that model, the cleanest solution for our current problem may indeed be to not just promote one more precise value (sett), but two of them. If we had a less ambiguous synonym for the technical definition of "cobblestone", that would not only allow us to pull off something similar to the farm subdivision, it would also take care of the misunderstandings between technical vs. colloquial usage.

Just my thought! I previously proposed "natural_cobblestone" for those uneven, unhewn, non-sett cobblestones. It's not a real English word, but it should be quite clear what is meant, should it not? Another alternative: "unhewn_cobblestone"

Offline

#32 2018-02-02 11:09:23

Brian de Ford
Member
From: Cardigan, Ceredigion, UK
Registered: 2017-08-30
Posts: 108

Re: Cobblestones vs setts vs paving stones

westnordost wrote:

Err, back to the cobblestone topic:

Perhaps it's worth looking at an example of what I'd consider a successful transition: The subdivision of "farm" into "farmland" and "farmyard". What made it work, imo, was that there were two new terms. This meant that landuse=farm wasn't instantly wrong – merely imprecise – and that you could see which tags were following the new definition and which ones were left over from before the change and needed a revisit.

Based on that model, the cleanest solution for our current problem may indeed be to not just promote one more precise value (sett), but two of them. If we had a less ambiguous synonym for the technical definition of "cobblestone", that would not only allow us to pull off something similar to the farm subdivision, it would also take care of the misunderstandings between technical vs. colloquial usage.

Just my thought! I previously proposed "natural_cobblestone" for those uneven, unhewn, non-sett cobblestones. It's not a real English word, but it should be quite clear what is meant, should it not? Another alternative: "unhewn_cobblestone"

I thought I'd posted this before, but must be mistaken.

If we're just looking for a synonym to cobblestone to facilitate a transition, how about surface=cobbles?  Or, if we want to get silly, surface=lumpy?

Offline

#33 2018-02-02 12:29:48

westnordost
Member
From: Hamburg
Registered: 2013-07-13
Posts: 175

Re: Cobblestones vs setts vs paving stones

We are not looking for a synonym for the colloquial "cobblestone" but specifically this cobblestone made from natural unhewn stone. The clear distinction to cobblestone as generic term should be reflected in the name.

Last edited by westnordost (2018-02-02 12:30:24)

Offline

#34 2018-02-02 13:36:33

ftrebien
Inactive
From: Porto Alegre, Brazil
Registered: 2013-05-18
Posts: 772

Re: Cobblestones vs setts vs paving stones

The problem with the word natural is that it might be understood as referring to substance, shape, or both. Cobble already implies substance, and we're trying to identify shape, so maybe unhewn would be interesting (for example, unhewn_cobble or unhewn_cobblestone). It is not very well known though, judging from Google Images' results.

Also, cobblestone is generally understood as having some binder (cement, mortar) holding the stones in place. Using cobble alone might be understood as loose stones.

Offline

#35 2018-02-02 15:21:37

Brian de Ford
Member
From: Cardigan, Ceredigion, UK
Registered: 2017-08-30
Posts: 108

Re: Cobblestones vs setts vs paving stones

ftrebien wrote:

Also, cobblestone is generally understood as having some binder (cement, mortar) holding the stones in place. Using cobble alone might be understood as loose stones.

In my dialect, cobblestone and cobble (singular) would imply a single, possibly unbound, item whereas cobbles and cobblestones would refer to a collection of them, possibly bound, possibly not.  In my dialect it would be natural to refer to a cobbled street and peculiar to refer to a cobblestoned street.  In my dialect, cobble implies substance, shape.and usage.  Cobblestone doesn't imply usage as strongly.  "A street of cobbles is constructed using cobblestones" seems more natural (to me) than "A street of cobblestones is constructed using cobbles."

Other dialects of English may differ on some or all of those points.  Which may not be too important if we're just trying to come up with a new term so we can deprecate the abuse of the old term.  It's not ideal, but one has to expect rough edges. smile

Offline

#36 2018-02-02 22:27:57

westnordost
Member
From: Hamburg
Registered: 2013-07-13
Posts: 175

Re: Cobblestones vs setts vs paving stones

So, unhewn beats natural and cobblestone beats cobble/cobbles.

So, how about unhewn_cobblestone then?

Offline

#37 2018-02-04 21:15:24

Tordanik
Moderator
From: Germany
Registered: 2008-06-17
Posts: 2,225
Website

Re: Cobblestones vs setts vs paving stones

westnordost wrote:

So, how about unhewn_cobblestone then?

Glad to see some good suggestions, and at least to my non-native ears, unhewn_cobblestone sounds like a workable option that gets the distinction across. smile

Offline

#38 2018-02-05 12:24:49

ftrebien
Inactive
From: Porto Alegre, Brazil
Registered: 2013-05-18
Posts: 772

Re: Cobblestones vs setts vs paving stones

Then should we also define hewn_cobblestone in order to slowly phase out cobblestone?

Last edited by ftrebien (2018-02-05 12:24:56)

Offline

#39 2018-02-05 16:04:44

westnordost
Member
From: Hamburg
Registered: 2013-07-13
Posts: 175

Re: Cobblestones vs setts vs paving stones

Absolutely! I think since an agreement has been reached here, what's left to do is simply to document it in the wiki.
I will then also add it into the next StreetComplete version.

Offline

#40 2018-02-05 19:19:14

Tordanik
Moderator
From: Germany
Registered: 2008-06-17
Posts: 2,225
Website

Re: Cobblestones vs setts vs paving stones

ftrebien wrote:

Then should we also define hewn_cobblestone in order to slowly phase out cobblestone?

I haven't seen "hewn_cobblestone" in this thread yet, so can you elaborate a bit what you would use this value for? Perhaps using the images used before (e.g. here) as a reference point?

Offline

#41 2018-02-05 19:51:30

westnordost
Member
From: Hamburg
Registered: 2013-07-13
Posts: 175

Re: Cobblestones vs setts vs paving stones

Oh, I assumed that he mistyped it and meant unhewn_cobblestone. Basically, hewn cobblestone would be sett.

Offline

#42 2018-02-06 10:30:24

ftrebien
Inactive
From: Porto Alegre, Brazil
Registered: 2013-05-18
Posts: 772

Re: Cobblestones vs setts vs paving stones

Nevermind, hewn_cobblestone would really be the same as sett.

Last edited by ftrebien (2018-02-06 10:32:03)

Offline

#43 2018-02-06 20:33:48

Tordanik
Moderator
From: Germany
Registered: 2008-06-17
Posts: 2,225
Website

Re: Cobblestones vs setts vs paving stones

Ah, good to have that cleared up. Glad that we've reached a consensus then. smile

What remains is updating the wiki and getting mappers and devs to adopt this tagging. I'm happy to do my part for the latter by adding support to OSM2World.

Offline

#44 2018-02-11 12:49:21

westnordost
Member
From: Hamburg
Registered: 2013-07-13
Posts: 175

Re: Cobblestones vs setts vs paving stones

Mh, perhaps ftbrien or Tordanik could add this to the wiki, since both of you extensively analyzed the wording over the time in the wiki, so you have the best idea how to exactly phrase it.

I am ready to do my part by letting StreetComplete use the new tag, but I would want to have it documented first.

Offline

#45 2018-02-14 23:05:18

ftrebien
Inactive
From: Porto Alegre, Brazil
Registered: 2013-05-18
Posts: 772

Re: Cobblestones vs setts vs paving stones

Done. New definition, let me know if you agree/disagree:

surface=sett: Sett paving, formed from natural stones cut to a regular shape.  The stones do not cover the surface completely, unlike paving_stones.
100px-Granite_Setts.jpg

surface=unhewn_cobblestone: Cobblestone paving, formed from natural, uncut, overall rounded stones. Joined by a rigid binder, unlike pebblestone.
100px-Ancient_road_surface.jpg

surface=cobblestone: Cobblestones in the colloquial sense. This value may give only a rough description; if possible, use a more precise value such as sett or unhewn_cobblestone.
100px-Granite_Setts.jpg100px-Ancient_road_surface.jpg

Last edited by ftrebien (2018-02-15 12:17:15)

Offline

#46 2018-02-16 19:59:58

Tordanik
Moderator
From: Germany
Registered: 2008-06-17
Posts: 2,225
Website

Re: Cobblestones vs setts vs paving stones

New definition, let me know if you agree/disagree

The definitions sound good to me, thanks for adding them to the wiki.

What about the cobblestone:raised value you added a while ago, though? Wouldn't that also fall under unhewn_cobblestone using our new definitions?

Offline

#47 2018-02-16 20:15:37

ftrebien
Inactive
From: Porto Alegre, Brazil
Registered: 2013-05-18
Posts: 772

Re: Cobblestones vs setts vs paving stones

I'll let you remove that if you think it should go. I added it because (1) nobody complained about it on the tagging list when I suggested it, and (2) many have pointed out, when referring to that image, that such pavement significantly affects traffic, particularly pedestrians and cyclists, and that such pavement seems to be intended to deter traffic.

Offline

#48 2018-02-18 11:32:51

westnordost
Member
From: Hamburg
Registered: 2013-07-13
Posts: 175

Re: Cobblestones vs setts vs paving stones

I think I'd remove that then. The raised cobblestones would then really just be a subcategory of unhewn cobblestone and there is no clear line to distinguish these two (less raised vs more raised). Distinguishing unhewn from sett is already a good step forward.

Offline

#49 2018-02-18 18:57:49

westnordost
Member
From: Hamburg
Registered: 2013-07-13
Posts: 175

Re: Cobblestones vs setts vs paving stones

Done: https://github.com/westnordost/StreetCo … 6dfd59c48b
And removed cobblestone:raised from the wiki.

Offline

#50 2018-03-14 21:08:00

Carlos Brys
Member
From: Posadas, Misiones, Argentina
Registered: 2011-12-30
Posts: 12
Website

Re: Cobblestones vs setts vs paving stones

I have seen that in the wiki are strikethrough out and do not advise using the type of surface cobblestone:flattened to avoid confusion with sett and unhewn_cobblestone.

I think that in the discussion did not take into account a way of making pavements that is used in the south of Brazil and northeast of Argentina (see in overpass: http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/x19 ), which is called "brazilian cobbled style", which is a variant of the known as portuguese pavement (see: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portuguese_pavement ).

The brazilian cobbled style is made with basalt stone and fits what can be defined as "cobblestone:flattened": natural stone, crushed, smoothed surface, irregular, binder witk earth.

As you can see in the images:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Fil … lero_1.jpg
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Fil … lero_2.jpg

For this surface, I think that the type sett (stones with regular format) or unhewn_cobblestone (uncut, with rigid binder) is not suitable.

For this, I request that consider modifying the wiki and not removing the "cobblestone:flattened" option to be able to use it on brazilian cobbled style pavement.

Last edited by Carlos Brys (2018-03-14 22:01:00)

Offline

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB