Drop the tiger:reviewed tag from roads

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
16 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Drop the tiger:reviewed tag from roads

Clifford Snow
The tag, tiger:reviewed that is left over from the 2006/7 import of TIGER roads has lost any meaning. For example, look at 196th Avenue Southwest [1] in Thurston County WA. It's on version 6 yet still has tiger:reviewed=no. Note I picked this street at random from a overpass query [2]. I see this tag all the time. It's time to get rid of it. Not through a mechanical edit, but by editors making changes to roads.

I'm proposing to open a ticket for JOSM to add this tag to the list of discarded tags. I'd like to hear if there are any objects or think this is a good idea.

I did learn from Toby Murray this morning that you can add tiger:reviewed to the list of discarded tags in JOSM by going to preferences->Advanced Preferences and adding tiger:reviewed to tags.discardable. Then just reload JOSM for the changed to be active.


Clifford

--
@osm_seattle
OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch

_______________________________________________
Talk-us mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Drop the tiger:reviewed tag from roads

Bryan Housel
I agree it would be great to get rid of `tiger:reviewed`. 
I proposed this for iD 3 years ago but received some pushback:  https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/issues/2697

I would be ok if it were removed via a mechanical edit.

As an aside, I think it would be great to move to a GitHub/Slack based workflow for mechanical edits and imports so ideas like this don’t get lost.  
Even if the broader OSM community wants to keep their discussions on wiki/mailinglist, we can change what we do for US-scoped edits to work a bit more efficiently.
 
Thanks Bryan


On May 11, 2018, at 12:25 PM, Clifford Snow <[hidden email]> wrote:

The tag, tiger:reviewed that is left over from the 2006/7 import of TIGER roads has lost any meaning. For example, look at 196th Avenue Southwest [1] in Thurston County WA. It's on version 6 yet still has tiger:reviewed=no. Note I picked this street at random from a overpass query [2]. I see this tag all the time. It's time to get rid of it. Not through a mechanical edit, but by editors making changes to roads.

I'm proposing to open a ticket for JOSM to add this tag to the list of discarded tags. I'd like to hear if there are any objects or think this is a good idea.

I did learn from Toby Murray this morning that you can add tiger:reviewed to the list of discarded tags in JOSM by going to preferences->Advanced Preferences and adding tiger:reviewed to tags.discardable. Then just reload JOSM for the changed to be active.


Clifford

--
@osm_seattle
OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch
_______________________________________________
Talk-us mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us


_______________________________________________
Talk-us mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Drop the tiger:reviewed tag from roads

Mike N.
In reply to this post by Clifford Snow
On 5/11/2018 12:25 PM, Clifford Snow wrote:
> I'm proposing to open a ticket for JOSM to add this tag to the list of
> discarded tags. I'd like to hear if there are any objects or think this
> is a good idea.
>
> I did learn from Toby Murray this morning that you can add
> tiger:reviewed to the list of discarded tags in JOSM by going to
> preferences->Advanced Preferences and adding tiger:reviewed to
> tags.discardable. Then just reload JOSM for the changed to be active.


   I'm not quite convinced since there can still be local uses and
conventions.  I used it to show that I confirmed a road's name and where
it began and ended.   Others use it to mean full survey with all
attributes and signage have been collected.  But since JOSM defaults not
to show that flag visually, I've almost stopped updating it also.   So I
have to agree that it is no longer as useful as it once was.

  And regarding other projects: where I was thinking of a local mass
edit to confirm conguency and remove the flag after obtaining and
following a process to get a county to contribute data to OSM, it
wouldn't matter if the tiger:reviewed tag was present - I would still
match OSM roads to new data and investigate any differences.

   Bottom line - no objection here though.

_______________________________________________
Talk-us mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Drop the tiger:reviewed tag from roads

Martijn van Exel-3
In reply to this post by Clifford Snow
I believe folks still use it in places to indicate that no-one has reviewed it on the ground, but I cannot find the thread(s) where that was brought up.

I think a mechanical removal may be a bit overzealous, even though I personally wouldn't shed a tear. As long as there is at least one tag left that would indicate TIGER as the original source, so we can continue to detect 'unmodified TIGER' roads.
--
  Martijn van Exel



On Fri, May 11, 2018, at 10:25, Clifford Snow wrote:
The tag, tiger:reviewed that is left over from the 2006/7 import of TIGER roads has lost any meaning. For example, look at 196th Avenue Southwest [1] in Thurston County WA. It's on version 6 yet still has tiger:reviewed=no. Note I picked this street at random from a overpass query [2]. I see this tag all the time. It's time to get rid of it. Not through a mechanical edit, but by editors making changes to roads.

I'm proposing to open a ticket for JOSM to add this tag to the list of discarded tags. I'd like to hear if there are any objects or think this is a good idea.

I did learn from Toby Murray this morning that you can add tiger:reviewed to the list of discarded tags in JOSM by going to preferences->Advanced Preferences and adding tiger:reviewed to tags.discardable. Then just reload JOSM for the changed to be active.


Clifford

--
@osm_seattle
OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch
_______________________________________________
Talk-us mailing list


_______________________________________________
Talk-us mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Drop the tiger:reviewed tag from roads

Steve Friedl
> I believe folks still use it in places to indicate that no-one has reviewed it on the ground, but I cannot find the thread(s) where that was brought up.

I’m exactly one of those users: once I’ve confirmed or fixed the object, I delete the tag, so this is still useful for me as a kind of to-do list.

I also delete tiger:reviewed=yes tags when otherwise editing an object.

Steve


From: Martijn van Exel [mailto:[hidden email]]
Sent: Friday, May 11, 2018 9:56 AM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Drop the tiger:reviewed tag from roads

I believe folks still use it in places to indicate that no-one has reviewed it on the ground, but I cannot find the thread(s) where that was brought up.

I think a mechanical removal may be a bit overzealous, even though I personally wouldn't shed a tear. As long as there is at least one tag left that would indicate TIGER as the original source, so we can continue to detect 'unmodified TIGER' roads.
--
  Martijn van Exel
  mailto:[hidden email]



On Fri, May 11, 2018, at 10:25, Clifford Snow wrote:
The tag, tiger:reviewed that is left over from the 2006/7 import of TIGER roads has lost any meaning. For example, look at 196th Avenue Southwest [1] in Thurston County WA. It's on version 6 yet still has tiger:reviewed=no. Note I picked this street at random from a overpass query [2]. I see this tag all the time. It's time to get rid of it. Not through a mechanical edit, but by editors making changes to roads.

I'm proposing to open a ticket for JOSM to add this tag to the list of discarded tags. I'd like to hear if there are any objects or think this is a good idea.

I did learn from Toby Murray this morning that you can add tiger:reviewed to the list of discarded tags in JOSM by going to preferences->Advanced Preferences and adding tiger:reviewed to tags.discardable. Then just reload JOSM for the changed to be active.

[1] http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/173554611
[2] http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/yJh

Clifford

--
@osm_seattle
http://osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us
OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch
_______________________________________________
Talk-us mailing list
mailto:[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us



_______________________________________________
Talk-us mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Drop the tiger:reviewed tag from roads

Martijn van Exel-3
I was thinking about this some more. I do still actually use the visual cue (yellow) in JOSM to see which roads I want to double-check when editing in an area. I don't know if this is still enabled in JOSM by default but it's available as one of the default paint styles.
--
  Martijn van Exel
  [hidden email]

On Fri, May 11, 2018, at 10:59, Steve Friedl wrote:

> > I believe folks still use it in places to indicate that no-one has reviewed it on the ground, but I cannot find the thread(s) where that was brought up.
>
> I’m exactly one of those users: once I’ve confirmed or fixed the object,
> I delete the tag, so this is still useful for me as a kind of to-do
> list.
>
> I also delete tiger:reviewed=yes tags when otherwise editing an object.
>
> Steve
>
>
> From: Martijn van Exel [mailto:[hidden email]]
> Sent: Friday, May 11, 2018 9:56 AM
> To: [hidden email]
> Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Drop the tiger:reviewed tag from roads
>
> I believe folks still use it in places to indicate that no-one has
> reviewed it on the ground, but I cannot find the thread(s) where that
> was brought up.
>
> I think a mechanical removal may be a bit overzealous, even though I
> personally wouldn't shed a tear. As long as there is at least one tag
> left that would indicate TIGER as the original source, so we can
> continue to detect 'unmodified TIGER' roads.
> --
>   Martijn van Exel
>   mailto:[hidden email]
>
>
>
> On Fri, May 11, 2018, at 10:25, Clifford Snow wrote:
> The tag, tiger:reviewed that is left over from the 2006/7 import of
> TIGER roads has lost any meaning. For example, look at 196th Avenue
> Southwest [1] in Thurston County WA. It's on version 6 yet still has
> tiger:reviewed=no. Note I picked this street at random from a overpass
> query [2]. I see this tag all the time. It's time to get rid of it. Not
> through a mechanical edit, but by editors making changes to roads.
>
> I'm proposing to open a ticket for JOSM to add this tag to the list of
> discarded tags. I'd like to hear if there are any objects or think this
> is a good idea.
>
> I did learn from Toby Murray this morning that you can add
> tiger:reviewed to the list of discarded tags in JOSM by going to
> preferences->Advanced Preferences and adding tiger:reviewed to
> tags.discardable. Then just reload JOSM for the changed to be active.
>
> [1] http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/173554611
> [2] http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/yJh
>
> Clifford
>
> --
> @osm_seattle
> http://osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us
> OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-us mailing list
> mailto:[hidden email]
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>
>

_______________________________________________
Talk-us mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Drop the tiger:reviewed tag from roads

Jack Burke-2
I kinda object to any type of mechanical removal of this tag, mainly because I do still use it.  I've modified JOSM's settings to show the yellow highlight, and I periodically go on a TIGER editing spree, especially in the county I live in.  It has been very valuable in finding and fixing misnamed roads and other errors.

One of my main objections to a mechanical removal is that there are numerous rural-area roads where the only edit I've done is to add the county road number as a ref tag (often I will document these as a voice note in OsmAnd as I drive past them on a higher-priority road).  I won't necessarily have verified the road name, surface, or any other attributes at the time.

--jack


On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 1:05 PM, Martijn van Exel <[hidden email]> wrote:
I was thinking about this some more. I do still actually use the visual cue (yellow) in JOSM to see which roads I want to double-check when editing in an area. I don't know if this is still enabled in JOSM by default but it's available as one of the default paint styles.
--
  Martijn van Exel
  [hidden email]

On Fri, May 11, 2018, at 10:59, Steve Friedl wrote:
> > I believe folks still use it in places to indicate that no-one has reviewed it on the ground, but I cannot find the thread(s) where that was brought up.
>
> I’m exactly one of those users: once I’ve confirmed or fixed the object,
> I delete the tag, so this is still useful for me as a kind of to-do
> list.
>
> I also delete tiger:reviewed=yes tags when otherwise editing an object.
>
> Steve
>
>
> From: Martijn van Exel [mailto:[hidden email]]
> Sent: Friday, May 11, 2018 9:56 AM
> To: [hidden email]
> Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Drop the tiger:reviewed tag from roads
>
> I believe folks still use it in places to indicate that no-one has
> reviewed it on the ground, but I cannot find the thread(s) where that
> was brought up.
>
> I think a mechanical removal may be a bit overzealous, even though I
> personally wouldn't shed a tear. As long as there is at least one tag
> left that would indicate TIGER as the original source, so we can
> continue to detect 'unmodified TIGER' roads.
> --
>   Martijn van Exel
>   mailto:[hidden email]
>
>
>
> On Fri, May 11, 2018, at 10:25, Clifford Snow wrote:
> The tag, tiger:reviewed that is left over from the 2006/7 import of
> TIGER roads has lost any meaning. For example, look at 196th Avenue
> Southwest [1] in Thurston County WA. It's on version 6 yet still has
> tiger:reviewed=no. Note I picked this street at random from a overpass
> query [2]. I see this tag all the time. It's time to get rid of it. Not
> through a mechanical edit, but by editors making changes to roads.
>
> I'm proposing to open a ticket for JOSM to add this tag to the list of
> discarded tags. I'd like to hear if there are any objects or think this
> is a good idea.
>
> I did learn from Toby Murray this morning that you can add
> tiger:reviewed to the list of discarded tags in JOSM by going to
> preferences->Advanced Preferences and adding tiger:reviewed to
> tags.discardable. Then just reload JOSM for the changed to be active.
>
> [1] http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/173554611
> [2] http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/yJh
>
> Clifford
>
> --
> @osm_seattle
> http://osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us
> OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-us mailing list
> mailto:[hidden email]
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>
>

_______________________________________________
Talk-us mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us


_______________________________________________
Talk-us mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Drop the tiger:reviewed tag from roads

Clifford Snow
In reply to this post by Bryan Housel
Bryan,
There are members of the US community that object to using proprietary apps such as Slack. I respect their opinion that I used the mailing list to get a consensus.

I do enjoy Slack, but like forums, thread can be missed, especially as we build the community on slack with more and more posts.

Hopefully this conversation will give us a clear consensus on tiger:reviewed

Clifford

Sent from my Android phone.

On Fri, May 11, 2018, 9:45 AM Bryan Housel <[hidden email]> wrote:
I agree it would be great to get rid of `tiger:reviewed`. 
I proposed this for iD 3 years ago but received some pushback:  https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/issues/2697

I would be ok if it were removed via a mechanical edit.

As an aside, I think it would be great to move to a GitHub/Slack based workflow for mechanical edits and imports so ideas like this don’t get lost.  
Even if the broader OSM community wants to keep their discussions on wiki/mailinglist, we can change what we do for US-scoped edits to work a bit more efficiently.
 
Thanks Bryan


On May 11, 2018, at 12:25 PM, Clifford Snow <[hidden email]> wrote:

The tag, tiger:reviewed that is left over from the 2006/7 import of TIGER roads has lost any meaning. For example, look at 196th Avenue Southwest [1] in Thurston County WA. It's on version 6 yet still has tiger:reviewed=no. Note I picked this street at random from a overpass query [2]. I see this tag all the time. It's time to get rid of it. Not through a mechanical edit, but by editors making changes to roads.

I'm proposing to open a ticket for JOSM to add this tag to the list of discarded tags. I'd like to hear if there are any objects or think this is a good idea.

I did learn from Toby Murray this morning that you can add tiger:reviewed to the list of discarded tags in JOSM by going to preferences->Advanced Preferences and adding tiger:reviewed to tags.discardable. Then just reload JOSM for the changed to be active.


Clifford

--
@osm_seattle
OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch
_______________________________________________
Talk-us mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us


_______________________________________________
Talk-us mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Drop the tiger:reviewed tag from roads

Mike Thompson
In reply to this post by Martijn van Exel-3


On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 10:56 AM, Martijn van Exel <[hidden email]> wrote:
 As long as there is at least one tag left that would indicate TIGER as the original source, so we can continue to detect 'unmodified TIGER' roads.
-
Just because a TIGER road has been modified doesn't mean it has been verified, for example if you add a side street you will probably have to add a shared node at its intersection with the road in question, and that would bump the version - meaning it is now "modified" even though the mapper may not have reviewed the entire length of the TIGER road.  Conversely, just because a TIGER road is still at version 0, doesn't mean it hasn't been verified as existing nodes that make up the way can be moved without bumping the version on the way.  


_______________________________________________
Talk-us mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Drop the tiger:reviewed tag from roads

Martijn van Exel-3
Very true Mike. There is still some value in detecting TIGER roads that are in 'original' state. For example, if you can detect a cluster of 'unmodified' TIGER roads, that would point to an area entirely untouched by human editors.

I write 'original' and 'unmodified' in quotes, because a number of bots have touched most TIGER imported ways, so TIGER ways having version=1 are rare.
--
  Martijn van Exel



On Fri, May 11, 2018, at 11:44, Mike Thompson wrote:


On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 10:56 AM, Martijn van Exel <[hidden email]> wrote:

 As long as there is at least one tag left that would indicate TIGER as the original source, so we can continue to detect 'unmodified TIGER' roads.
-
Just because a TIGER road has been modified doesn't mean it has been verified, for example if you add a side street you will probably have to add a shared node at its intersection with the road in question, and that would bump the version - meaning it is now "modified" even though the mapper may not have reviewed the entire length of the TIGER road.  Conversely, just because a TIGER road is still at version 0, doesn't mean it hasn't been verified as existing nodes that make up the way can be moved without bumping the version on the way.  



_______________________________________________
Talk-us mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Drop the tiger:reviewed tag from roads

Doug Hembry
In reply to this post by Clifford Snow
One contrary view: I regret to say that there are still quite a few
"tiger:reviewed=no" roads in my neck of the woods - the south San
Francisco Bay area. I select the setting to highlight them in JOSM, and
use it to remind myself to try to survey and fully tag them. Where
possible I prefer to actually drive the road before removing the tag.
Or, where impractical (like private roads), at least use imagery to
adjust their alignment. If the tag wasn't there I'd pretty soon loose
track of which roads needed attention.

So I cast a vote for keeping it. At least don't mechanically remove them
all, everywhere.

- Doug

_______________________________________________
Talk-us mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Drop the tiger:reviewed tag from roads

Richard Welty-2
On 5/11/18 2:00 PM, Doug Hembry wrote:
> So I cast a vote for keeping it. At least don't mechanically remove them
> all, everywhere.
i still use the reviewed tags for guidance as well, and would prefer
that they
stick around. i remove them when i've reviewed a road carefully (name,
connectivity, location, classification, surface.)

richard

--
[hidden email]
 Averill Park Networking - GIS & IT Consulting
 OpenStreetMap - PostgreSQL - Linux
 Java - Web Applications - Search


_______________________________________________
Talk-us mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Drop the tiger:reviewed tag from roads

stevea
In reply to this post by Clifford Snow
The legacy of TIGER-tagging will persist in OSM for a long, long time.  That is the reality of the import we did, rough/sloppy data and all.  This legacy serves as many lessons to be learned regarding the practice(s) of wide-scale imports.  If it sounds like I'm saying "we made this bed, so now we must sleep in it," you are correct.  There are no easy solutions, though there may be better ones.

As TIGER data remain a dominant source of road/highway data in the US (plus MANY improvements), obfuscating their source in the guise of "cleaning up their history" does not help.  In fact, a wholesale deletion of tags different than we delete them now (and have) hinders the continuing clean-up/improvement of these data.  I elect to continue to clean up noisy/messy/sloppy TIGER data where/when/as I can.  When these data reach a state of "good enough that I would enter them into OSM" (as good OSM Contributors, we share such judgements) I remove the tiger_reviewed tag.  I support others who do so, too.  Largely speaking, this is how we'll "solve" this, although solving with smarter/better solutions is certainly welcome.

Slowly, slowly indeed, we clean up TIGER.  It will take years, it may take decades.  I 100% support talking about strategies (especially better ones) to do so, I support the chip-chip-chip away at messy data that need improving as we have since TIGER finished uploading.  However, wholesale deletion of tags, as doing so contradicts the workflow we have evolved, no, I do not abide that.  Should we want to improve that workflow, I'm listening.  But (politely, Clifford) I reject that the tiger:reviewed tag has lost all meaning.

We can be more clever, we can be more zealous, but let's not be more blind.

SteveA
California
_______________________________________________
Talk-us mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Drop the tiger:reviewed tag from roads

Wolfgang Zenker
In reply to this post by Richard Welty-2
* Richard Welty <[hidden email]> [180511 20:16]:
> On 5/11/18 2:00 PM, Doug Hembry wrote:
>> So I cast a vote for keeping it. At least don't mechanically remove them
>> all, everywhere.

> i still use the reviewed tags for guidance as well, and would prefer
> that they
> stick around. i remove them when i've reviewed a road carefully (name,
> connectivity, location, classification, surface.)

same for me; loosing this tag would make it much harder for me to
keep track of the roads I have already reviewed/fixed and which ones are
still to do.

Wolfgang

_______________________________________________
Talk-us mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Drop the tiger:reviewed tag from roads

Clifford Snow
Just to clarify, I'm not proposing a mechanical edit. I don't think it's appropriate. 

From reading the responses, most people would prefer to keep the tag tiger:reviewed. I respect it and will not ask for a change in JOSM.

Clifford






On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 2:15 PM, Wolfgang Zenker <[hidden email]> wrote:
* Richard Welty <[hidden email]> [180511 20:16]:
> On 5/11/18 2:00 PM, Doug Hembry wrote:
>> So I cast a vote for keeping it. At least don't mechanically remove them
>> all, everywhere.

> i still use the reviewed tags for guidance as well, and would prefer
> that they
> stick around. i remove them when i've reviewed a road carefully (name,
> connectivity, location, classification, surface.)

same for me; loosing this tag would make it much harder for me to
keep track of the roads I have already reviewed/fixed and which ones are
still to do.

Wolfgang

_______________________________________________
Talk-us mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us



--
@osm_seattle
OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch

_______________________________________________
Talk-us mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Drop the tiger:reviewed tag from roads

Richard Fairhurst
In reply to this post by Clifford Snow
Clifford Snow wrote:
> I did learn from Toby Murray this morning that you can add
> tiger:reviewed to the list of discarded tags in JOSM by going
> to preferences->Advanced Preferences and adding
> tiger:reviewed to tags.discardable. Then just reload
> JOSM for the changed to be active.

Just an additional data point: I use tiger:reviewed extensively in
cycle.travel's mapping and routing to make sense of OSM in rural areas.

Bike routing generally prefers minor roads with fewer cars (residential,
unclassified, tertiary) and avoids major roads with many cars (primary,
trunk, motorway). Bike routers will usually try and maximise the use of
residential roads.

Because TIGER class A41 was imported as highway=residential, and much of A41
is dirt tracks or worse, applying these routing weightings to the US would
mean that the router seeks out what are often unrideable routes.
tiger:reviewed is a useful signifier that someone has actually looked at a
residential road and verified that it is a residential road as we understand
it in OSM. So, for the sake of us cyclists, please don't clear
tiger:reviewed if you haven't reviewed a road!

(In urban areas I do agree that tiger:reviewed is often now worthless.)

cheers
Richard



--
Sent from: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/USA-f5284732.html

_______________________________________________
Talk-us mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us