Legible London signs - tagging suggestions

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

Legible London signs - tagging suggestions

Robert Skedgell
Does anyone have any suggestions for tagging nodes for the Legible London
signs/maps (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legible_London and https://
tfl.gov.uk/info-for/boroughs/maps-and-signs )?

Perhaps:
        tourism=information
        information=map
        map_type=street
        map_size=site
        name=*
        ref=legible_london

--
Robert Skedgell (rskedgell)

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

Re: Legible London signs - tagging suggestions

David Groom

Not quite sure what you had in mind by the tags map_type and map_size,
but maybe need a tag something along the likes of "sign_type" withn
values of "bollard | monolith | finger_post | totem" ( see
http://content.tfl.gov.uk/legible-london-product-range.pdf)

David


------ Original Message ------
From: "Robert Skedgell" <[hidden email]>
To: [hidden email]
Sent: 10/01/2017 07:54:41
Subject: [Talk-GB] Legible London signs - tagging suggestions

>Does anyone have any suggestions for tagging nodes for the Legible
>London
>signs/maps (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legible_London and
>https://
>tfl.gov.uk/info-for/boroughs/maps-and-signs )?
>
>Perhaps:
>  tourism=information
>  information=map
>  map_type=street
>  map_size=site
>  name=*
>  ref=legible_london
>
>--
>Robert Skedgell (rskedgell)
>
>_______________________________________________
>Talk-GB mailing list
>[hidden email]
>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb



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

Re: Legible London signs - tagging suggestions

Robert Skedgell
In reply to this post by Robert Skedgell

The wiki lists map_type and map_size as "useful combinations" for the tag combination tourism=information + information=map ( https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:information%3Dmap ).

Using map_type=street probably makes sense as it is already in use and seems a reasonable match for the feature.

I am rather more dubious about map_size, partly because nothing currently in use really seems to fit and partly because "size" seems potentially ambiguous to convey information about the area covered.

I was aware of the different types of sign listed in TfL's product range PDF, but was not really convinced that the distinction between monolith and totem (or variants of minilith) would really be useful. Something other than tourism=information + information=map would be needed for the waymarker bollard and fingerposts in any case as these do not have maps.


-------- Original message --------
From: David Groom <[hidden email]>
Date: 10/01/2017 10:59 (GMT+00:00)
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Legible London signs - tagging suggestions


Not quite sure what you had in mind by the tags map_type and map_size,
but maybe need a tag something along the likes of "sign_type" withn
values of "bollard | monolith | finger_post | totem" ( see
http://content.tfl.gov.uk/legible-london-product-range.pdf)

David


------ Original Message ------
From: "Robert Skedgell" <[hidden email]>
To: [hidden email]
Sent: 10/01/2017 07:54:41
Subject: [Talk-GB] Legible London signs - tagging suggestions

>Does anyone have any suggestions for tagging nodes for the Legible
>London
>signs/maps (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legible_London and
>https://
>tfl.gov.uk/info-for/boroughs/maps-and-signs )?
>
>Perhaps:
>  tourism=information
>  information=map
>  map_type=street
>  map_size=site
>  name=*
>  ref=legible_london
>
>--
>Robert Skedgell (rskedgell)
>
>_______________________________________________
>Talk-GB mailing list
>[hidden email]
>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb



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

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

Re: Legible London signs - tagging suggestions

Philip Barnes
In reply to this post by Robert Skedgell
On Tue, 2017-01-10 at 07:54 +0000, Robert Skedgell wrote:

> Does anyone have any suggestions for tagging nodes for the Legible
> London 
> signs/maps (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legible_London and
> https://
> tfl.gov.uk/info-for/boroughs/maps-and-signs )?
> s
> Perhaps:
> tourism=information
> information=map
> map_type=street
> map_size=site
> name=*
> ref=legible_london
>

Your suggested tagging seems fine, however I am not sure 'Legible'
really describes them. I have personally found them to be confusing
when needing to re-orientate myself when leaving a tube station.

Phil (trigpoint)

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

Re: Legible London signs - tagging suggestions

Andy Allan
In reply to this post by Robert Skedgell
On 10 January 2017 at 07:54, Robert Skedgell <[hidden email]> wrote:

>         ref=legible_london

I would only use the ref= tag if there is a reference code for each
installation, e.g. if the totem has a displayed reference like "A01"
designed for users to see. From the pictures I don't think that they
do, and if they did, I would expect it to be a reference for internal
use - i.e. official_ref=

Think of it like bus stops (ref=C) or road numbers (ref=A204). Would
it make sense if I was to render a map with an icon for the
information point, with the reference shown underneath?

I would suggest brand=legible_london as an alternative, but there
might be other options too.

Thanks,
Andy

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

Re: Legible London signs - tagging suggestions

sk53.osm


On 10 January 2017 at 15:10, Andy Allan <[hidden email]> wrote:

Think of it like bus stops (ref=C) or road numbers (ref=A204). Would
it make sense if I was to render a map with an icon for the
information point, with the reference shown underneath?

Thanks,
Andy


I was going to say that usually we have the atco code in ref for bus stops with the more visible stop C in local ref, and thus bus stops aren't the perfect example. I certainly wouldn't tell someone to wait at bus stop 3390V1 rather than V1.

I then felt obscurely cheated that the latter local_ref shows up on the Transport Map in bus stops in high zooms for London and some city centres, but apparently not elsewhere. Is this some magical trade secret or me just missing some tagging difference.

Jerry

 


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

Re: Legible London signs - tagging suggestions

Robert Skedgell
In reply to this post by Robert Skedgell

Andy

That's a very good point. I suspect that I mis-remembered the use of crossing_ref=* (used with highway=crossing + crossing=*) as just "ref".

brand=legible_london seems a much better fit, particularly as it makes it seem less of an assertion about the actual legibility of the map (as noted in an earlier comment).

Perhaps also operator=* for the borough responsible, or TfL as appropriate? 

-- 
Robert Skedgell  (rskedgell)


-------- Original message --------
From: Andy Allan <[hidden email]>
Date: 10/01/2017 15:10 (GMT+00:00)
To: Robert Skedgell <[hidden email]>
Cc: Talk-GB <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Legible London signs - tagging suggestions

On 10 January 2017 at 07:54, Robert Skedgell <[hidden email]> wrote:

>         ref=legible_london

I would only use the ref= tag if there is a reference code for each
installation, e.g. if the totem has a displayed reference like "A01"
designed for users to see. From the pictures I don't think that they
do, and if they did, I would expect it to be a reference for internal
use - i.e. official_ref=

Think of it like bus stops (ref=C) or road numbers (ref=A204). Would
it make sense if I was to render a map with an icon for the
information point, with the reference shown underneath?

I would suggest brand=legible_london as an alternative, but there
might be other options too.

Thanks,
Andy

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

Re: Legible London signs - tagging suggestions

Andy Mabbett
In reply to this post by Robert Skedgell
On 10 January 2017 at 07:54, Robert Skedgell <[hidden email]> wrote:

>     ref=legible_london

I'd expect to see something like:

    operator=legible_london

or, say:

    operator=GLA
    scheme=legible_london


--
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: Legible London signs - tagging suggestions

Dan S
2017-01-10 16:37 GMT+00:00 Andy Mabbett <[hidden email]>:
> On 10 January 2017 at 07:54, Robert Skedgell <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>>     ref=legible_london

Yeah, I agree this isn't the way "ref=" is normally used


> I'd expect to see something like:
>
>     operator=legible_london
>
> or, say:
>
>     operator=GLA
>     scheme=legible_london

Seems to me to have a strong analogy to eg the bike hire scheme so my
guess would have been

network=Legible London


Cheers
Dan

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

Re: Legible London signs - tagging suggestions

Andy Allan
In reply to this post by sk53.osm
On 10 January 2017 at 15:55, SK53 <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I was going to say that usually we have the atco code in ref for bus stops
> with the more visible stop C in local ref, and thus bus stops aren't the
> perfect example. I certainly wouldn't tell someone to wait at bus stop
> 3390V1 rather than V1.

Ah, that's my misremembering of the nuances of bus stop tagging. But I
don't want to drag this too far off-topic, so suffice to ignore
mentions of bus stops in my previous email.

> I then felt obscurely cheated that the latter local_ref shows up on the
> Transport Map in bus stops in high zooms for London and some city centres,
> but apparently not elsewhere. Is this some magical trade secret or me just
> missing some tagging difference.

It's limited to two characters at the moment, perhaps that's the
problem? If not, feel free to get in touch with an example and I'll
investigate.

Thanks,
Andy

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

Re: Legible London signs - tagging suggestions

sdoerr
In reply to this post by Robert Skedgell
On 10/01/2017 07:54, Robert Skedgell wrote:
> ref=legible_london
>

I don't understand the rationale for this as a 'ref'. Refs are normally
unique identifiers for a particular object (unique within a particular
domain, that is). Thus each sign would have a different ref, if there
were indeed a system of refs for Legible London signs. The value
'legible_london' looks more like a network tag.

--
Steve

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


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

Re: Legible London signs - tagging suggestions

Robert Skedgell
On Tuesday, 10 January 2017 21:46:53 GMT Steve Doerr wrote:
> On 10/01/2017 07:54, Robert Skedgell wrote:
> > ref=legible_london
>
> I don't understand the rationale for this as a 'ref'. Refs are normally
> unique identifiers for a particular object (unique within a particular
> domain, that is). Thus each sign would have a different ref, if there
> were indeed a system of refs for Legible London signs. The value
> 'legible_london' looks more like a network tag.

ref=* was (as already stated in another reply) an error in my thinking/
recollection - something like brand=legible_london or network=legible_london
would seem appropriate choices from the suggestions made.

On closer inspection of a few of the miniliths in Stratford, they do have a
unique ID number which would be an appropriate use for the ref key.

--
Robert Skedgell (rskedgell)

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