New Proposal

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
13 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

New Proposal

News-3
I have created a proposal for a new tagging scheme at
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/through_route

Please review and comment as necessary. As this is the first proposal
I've created please forgive me if I've jumped the gun anywhere or have
missed anything

Thanks

Paul

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: New Proposal

Philip Barnes
On Mon, 2013-04-29 at 18:59 +0100, News wrote:
> I have created a proposal for a new tagging scheme at
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/through_route
>
> Please review and comment as necessary. As this is the first proposal
> I've created please forgive me if I've jumped the gun anywhere or have
> missed anything
>
Good to see this one. The through_route relation has been used 362 times
so far, including by me. Hopefully getting it documented will see it
supported by routers.

Phil (trigpoint)


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: New Proposal

Dave F.
In reply to this post by News-3
On 29/04/2013 18:59, News wrote:
> I have created a proposal for a new tagging scheme at
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/through_route
>
 From the wiki Example:

"If you are heading north on the A56 and want to continue on the A56
then you need to turn off the main carriageway or you end up on the
A682. Currently any routing software based on OSM data will not tell you
to make a left turn"

Excuse my ignorance, but if your destination is Haslingden, why can't
the routing software send you left at that junction? What makes it
different to any other turning?

Cheers
Dave F.

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: New Proposal

Philip Barnes

The slip roads are straight ahead, whilst the through route curves to the right. The tag is need to tell the router that straight ahead is not stay on the same road.

Hope that explains it. 


Phil (trigpoint)

--

 

Sent from my Nokia N9

 


On 01/05/2013 11:00 Dave F. wrote:

On 29/04/2013 18:59, News wrote:
> I have created a proposal for a new tagging scheme at
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/through_route
>
From the wiki Example:

"If you are heading north on the A56 and want to continue on the A56
then you need to turn off the main carriageway or you end up on the
A682. Currently any routing software based on OSM data will not tell you
to make a left turn"

Excuse my ignorance, but if your destination is Haslingden, why can't
the routing software send you left at that junction? What makes it
different to any other turning?

Cheers
Dave F.

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: New Proposal

Georg Feddern-2
Am 01.05.2013 12:53, schrieb Philip Barnes:

The slip roads are straight ahead, whilst the through route curves to the right. The tag is need to tell the router that straight ahead is not stay on the same road.

Hope that explains it.


uhm, had you ever considered to tag both following ways as *_link?

In my opinion
- the A56 is a trunk_link, because you have to leave the previous lanes.
- the A682 is a primary_link, because you leave the A56.

In _both_ cases you need a hint from the router to be warned (like "keep left" or "keep right").
And AFAIK this would be already supported by routers.

Just my 2 cents.
Georg


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: New Proposal

Philip Barnes
On Wed, 2013-05-01 at 18:20 +0200, Georg Feddern wrote:

> Am 01.05.2013 12:53, schrieb Philip Barnes:
>
> > The slip roads are straight ahead, whilst the through route curves
> > to the right. The tag is need to tell the router that straight ahead
> > is not stay on the same road.
> >
> > Hope that explains it.
> >
> >
> >
>
> uhm, had you ever considered to tag both following ways as *_link?
>
> In my opinion
> - the A56 is a trunk_link, because you have to leave the previous
> lanes.
> - the A682 is a primary_link, because you leave the A56.
>
> In _both_ cases you need a hint from the router to be warned (like
> "keep left" or "keep right").
> And AFAIK this would be already supported by routers.
>
> Just my 2 cents.

That is just one example, this problem does not only exist with grade
separate roads. Take this example, http://osrm.at/36D

To stay on the A511 no instruction to turn is given, therefore it is
easy to continue straight ahead. Here it is on streetview
http://goo.gl/maps/8csRf (can you imagine a world without streetview?
wish we could do an opensource version).

There are lots of cases where it would be useful to give a mapper the
means to improve routing by a simple relation.

Phil (trigpoint)



_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: New Proposal

Kytömaa Lauri
>this example, http://osrm.at/36D
>To stay on the A511 no instruction to turn is given,

That just looks like a bug in the osrm.

--
Alv
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: New Proposal

Dave F.
In reply to this post by Philip Barnes
On 01/05/2013 18:26, Philip Barnes wrote:

That is just one example, this problem does not only exist with grade
separate roads. Take this example, http://osrm.at/36D

To stay on the A511 no instruction to turn is given, therefore it is
easy to continue straight ahead. 

The blue line shows it knows where to go. There's nothing wrong with it calculating the directions, but, as kytomaa suggests, it's missing a written instruction.

The OP's assertion that it's impossible to determine is a bit dramatic. The orientation of the ways to each other & that a road reference appears to change is irrelevant - if users wants to go to Haslingden, that's the road they should be on. Instructing them can't be that hard: "Take next left junction to stay on the A56". or how about this: http://tinyurl.com/br5c3fm 

Dave F.

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: New Proposal

News-3
On 02/05/13 00:40, Dave F. wrote:

> On 01/05/2013 18:26, Philip Barnes wrote:
>>
>> That is just one example, this problem does not only exist with grade
>> separate roads. Take this example,http://osrm.at/36D
>>
>> To stay on the A511 no instruction to turn is given, therefore it is
>> easy to continue straight ahead.
>
> The blue line shows it knows where to go. There's nothing wrong with it
> calculating the directions, but, as kytomaa suggests, it's missing a
> written instruction.
>
> The OP's assertion that it's impossible to determine is a bit dramatic.
> The orientation of the ways to each other & that a road reference
> appears to change is irrelevant - if users wants to go to Haslingden,
> that's the road they should be on. Instructing them can't be that hard:
> "Take next left junction to stay on the A56". or how about this:
> *http://tinyurl.com/br5c3fm*
>

So "impossible to determine" might be a little strong but the problem is
that routing software will not give the direction "Take next left
junction to stay on the A56" as it does not realise that there is a turn
here That's what the through_route relation is attempting to remedy.

Thanks


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: New Proposal

News-3
In reply to this post by Dave F.
On 02/05/13 00:40, Dave F. wrote:

> On 01/05/2013 18:26, Philip Barnes wrote:
>>
>> That is just one example, this problem does not only exist with grade
>> separate roads. Take this example,http://osrm.at/36D
>>
>> To stay on the A511 no instruction to turn is given, therefore it is
>> easy to continue straight ahead.
>
> The blue line shows it knows where to go. There's nothing wrong with it
> calculating the directions, but, as kytomaa suggests, it's missing a
> written instruction.
>
> The OP's assertion that it's impossible to determine is a bit dramatic.
> The orientation of the ways to each other & that a road reference
> appears to change is irrelevant - if users wants to go to Haslingden,
> that's the road they should be on. Instructing them can't be that hard:
> "Take next left junction to stay on the A56". or how about this:
> *http://tinyurl.com/br5c3fm*

If you follow the directions at http://osrm.at/374 you will continue
straight past the turning you need to take and end up in Rawtenstall
which doesn't give a good impression of the data or routing software
and is wrong because routing software cannot reliably determine that you
need to make a left turn here. This simple relation fixes this by saying
that at node x, connected to ways a, b and c then a-x-b is the
through_route (as indicated by markings on the road) and so any other
way must be left or right. With this information routing software can
then inform the traveller in plenty of time that a turn needs to be made

Thanks

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: New Proposal

Janko Mihelić
The first example should be resolved with tagging lanes, as seen in this link:

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Lanes#Motorway

The second one could use this proposal:

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/lanes_General_Extension

I'm not sure if the two tagging schemes are compatible, I've never looked at it enough.

Janko

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: New Proposal

News-3
On 02/05/13 17:34, Janko Mihelić wrote:

> The first example should be resolved with tagging lanes, as seen in this
> link:
>
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Lanes#Motorway
>
> The second one could use this proposal:
>
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/lanes_General_Extension
>
> I'm not sure if the two tagging schemes are compatible, I've never looked
> at it enough.
>
> Janko
>
>
>
The possibility of using the lanes tagging has been discussed on the
wiki discussion page and would not apply in this case as the situation
is not that the left hand lane becomes the A56 and the right the A682
but that both lanes of the carriageway become the A682 at the point of
the junction and that to remain on the A56 you have to turn off this
carriageway just the same as you would at any other motorway exit,
services exit or similar.

Thanks


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: New Proposal

John F. Eldredge
In reply to this post by News-3
In my experience, routers say "stay left" in such a circumstance.


News <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 02/05/13 00:40, Dave F. wrote:
> > On 01/05/2013 18:26, Philip Barnes wrote:
> >>
> >> That is just one example, this problem does not only exist with
> grade
> >> separate roads. Take this example,http://osrm.at/36D
> >>
> >> To stay on the A511 no instruction to turn is given, therefore it
> is
> >> easy to continue straight ahead.
> >
> > The blue line shows it knows where to go. There's nothing wrong with
> it
> > calculating the directions, but, as kytomaa suggests, it's missing a
> > written instruction.
> >
> > The OP's assertion that it's impossible to determine is a bit
> dramatic.
> > The orientation of the ways to each other & that a road reference
> > appears to change is irrelevant - if users wants to go to
> Haslingden,
> > that's the road they should be on. Instructing them can't be that
> hard:
> > "Take next left junction to stay on the A56". or how about this:
> > *http://tinyurl.com/br5c3fm*
> >
>
> So "impossible to determine" might be a little strong but the problem
> is
> that routing software will not give the direction "Take next left
> junction to stay on the A56" as it does not realise that there is a
> turn
> here That's what the through_route relation is attempting to remedy.
>
> Thanks
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

--
John F. Eldredge -- [hidden email]
"Reserve your right to think, for it is better to think wrongly than not to think at all." -- Hypatia of Alexandria

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging