cycle.travel US bike routing, and unreviewed rural TIGER

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

cycle.travel US bike routing, and unreviewed rural TIGER

Richard Fairhurst
Hi all,

At State of the Map US last weekend I was really pleased to unveil
bicycle routing for the US (and Canada) at my site, cycle.travel.

The planner, at http://cycle.travel/map , will plan a bike route for you
between any two points - whether in the same city or on opposite sides
of the continent. It's all based on OSM data but also takes account of
elevation and other factors.

I "dogfooded" it with a three-day ride around New York state after
SOTM-US, and it found me some lovely quiet roads in and around the
Catskills. I hope it'll be equally useful for the other two-wheelers
amongst us. There's still a lot I want to add (as detailed at
http://cycle.travel/news/new_cycle_travel_directions_for_the_us_and_canada)
but I hope you enjoy it.

Plug aside, there's a couple of things might be relevant to US mappers.


First of all, I'm aiming high with this - the aim isn't just to make the
best OSM-powered bike router of the US, but the best bike router full
stop for commuters, leisure cyclists and tourers. (I leave the
"athletes" to Strava!)

Here in Britain, experience over the years has been that good bike
routing and good bike cartography - historically via CycleStreets and
OpenCycleMap - are a really effective way of driving contributions to
OSM. So if you know cyclists who aren't yet contributing to OSM, maybe
throw this at them - and if it doesn't find the route they'd recommend,
maybe there's some unmapped infrastructure they could be persuaded to add!


Second, the routing and cartography both heavily distrust unreviewed TIGER.

In other words, it won't route over a rural road tagged as
        highway=residential
        tiger:reviewed=no

Any road with tiger:reviewed removed or altered, any road in urban
areas, and any road with highway=unclassified or greater is assumed to
be a usable paved road. (There are a few additional bits of logic but
that's the general principle.)

Unreviewed rural residentials are shown on the map (high zoom levels) as
a faint grey dashed line, explained in the key as "Unsurveyed road".

I've been finding this a really useful way of locating unreviewed TIGER
and fixing it... it's actually quite addictive. :) Looking for roads
which cross rivers, or with long sweeping curves, is an easy way of
identifying quick wins. My modus operandi is to retag 2+-lane roads with
painted centrelines as tertiary, smaller paved roads as unclassified,
and just to take the tiger:reviewed tag off paved residential roads.
Anything unpaved gets a surface tag and/or highway=track.

I can't promise minutely updates I'm afraid - the routing/map update
process takes two full days to run so it'll be more monthly than
minutely. But I hope you find it as useful as I do. You'll see there's a
tiny little "pen" icon at the bottom right of http://cycle.travel/map 
which takes you to edit the current location in OSM.


Finally, many thanks to everyone who's tested it so far, particularly
Steve All - your feedback was and continues to be enormously useful.

cheers
Richard

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

Re: cycle.travel US bike routing, and unreviewed rural TIGER

Harald Kliems
Very nice, Richard! One quick comment: I might not be the only who doesn't always change the tiger:reviewed tag when fixing TIGER-imported roads. I don't know if that's technically feasible, but maybe it would be better to check if a way has been modified since import, independent of the tiger:reviewed tag. I guess you could assign those a slightly lower priority than the ones that have tiger:reviewed=yes.

 Harald.

On Sat, Jun 13, 2015 at 1:38 PM Richard Fairhurst <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi all,

At State of the Map US last weekend I was really pleased to unveil
bicycle routing for the US (and Canada) at my site, cycle.travel.

The planner, at http://cycle.travel/map , will plan a bike route for you
between any two points - whether in the same city or on opposite sides
of the continent. It's all based on OSM data but also takes account of
elevation and other factors.

I "dogfooded" it with a three-day ride around New York state after
SOTM-US, and it found me some lovely quiet roads in and around the
Catskills. I hope it'll be equally useful for the other two-wheelers
amongst us. There's still a lot I want to add (as detailed at
http://cycle.travel/news/new_cycle_travel_directions_for_the_us_and_canada)
but I hope you enjoy it.

Plug aside, there's a couple of things might be relevant to US mappers.


First of all, I'm aiming high with this - the aim isn't just to make the
best OSM-powered bike router of the US, but the best bike router full
stop for commuters, leisure cyclists and tourers. (I leave the
"athletes" to Strava!)

Here in Britain, experience over the years has been that good bike
routing and good bike cartography - historically via CycleStreets and
OpenCycleMap - are a really effective way of driving contributions to
OSM. So if you know cyclists who aren't yet contributing to OSM, maybe
throw this at them - and if it doesn't find the route they'd recommend,
maybe there's some unmapped infrastructure they could be persuaded to add!


Second, the routing and cartography both heavily distrust unreviewed TIGER.

In other words, it won't route over a rural road tagged as
        highway=residential
        tiger:reviewed=no

Any road with tiger:reviewed removed or altered, any road in urban
areas, and any road with highway=unclassified or greater is assumed to
be a usable paved road. (There are a few additional bits of logic but
that's the general principle.)

Unreviewed rural residentials are shown on the map (high zoom levels) as
a faint grey dashed line, explained in the key as "Unsurveyed road".

I've been finding this a really useful way of locating unreviewed TIGER
and fixing it... it's actually quite addictive. :) Looking for roads
which cross rivers, or with long sweeping curves, is an easy way of
identifying quick wins. My modus operandi is to retag 2+-lane roads with
painted centrelines as tertiary, smaller paved roads as unclassified,
and just to take the tiger:reviewed tag off paved residential roads.
Anything unpaved gets a surface tag and/or highway=track.

I can't promise minutely updates I'm afraid - the routing/map update
process takes two full days to run so it'll be more monthly than
minutely. But I hope you find it as useful as I do. You'll see there's a
tiny little "pen" icon at the bottom right of http://cycle.travel/map
which takes you to edit the current location in OSM.


Finally, many thanks to everyone who's tested it so far, particularly
Steve All - your feedback was and continues to be enormously useful.

cheers
Richard

_______________________________________________
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: cycle.travel US bike routing, and unreviewed rural TIGER

Richard Welty-2
In reply to this post by Richard Fairhurst
On 6/13/15 2:38 PM, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
> I've been finding this a really useful way of locating unreviewed
> TIGER and fixing it... it's actually quite addictive. :) Looking for
> roads which cross rivers, or with long sweeping curves, is an easy way
> of identifying quick wins. My modus operandi is to retag 2+-lane roads
> with painted centrelines as tertiary, smaller paved roads as
> unclassified, and just to take the tiger:reviewed tag off paved
> residential roads. Anything unpaved gets a surface tag and/or
> highway=track.
i mostly like this. my big concern is that part of my personal
approach to tiger review is double checking the names on the
road signs and verifying any highway designations for any
needed correction of the ref tags. on the flip side, tiger review
is taking forever and maybe it's ok if that gets decoupled.

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

signature.asc (858 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: cycle.travel US bike routing, and unreviewed rural TIGER

OSM Volunteer stevea
In reply to this post by Richard Fairhurst
Richard Fairhurst writes:
>Finally, many thanks to everyone who's tested it so far,
>particularly Steve All - your feedback was and continues to be
>enormously useful.

Kind of you to say this, Richard.  I was delighted to help test your
fine bicycle router.  I wish cycle.travel, and especially
cycle.travel/map the very best in the future.

If you haven't tried to route a bicycle trip using this router (and
its underlying OSM data), you are missing out:  it is a tall problem
very well addressed, and it is actually quite fun to use.  See if you
can't "drag pins" to come up with a shorter route than the algorithm
does:  much of the time, you can't beat it!

SteveA
California

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

Re: cycle.travel US bike routing, and unreviewed rural TIGER

Minh Nguyen-2
In reply to this post by Harald Kliems
On 2015-06-13 17:08, Harald Kliems wrote:
> Very nice, Richard! One quick comment: I might not be the only who
> doesn't always change the tiger:reviewed tag when fixing TIGER-imported
> roads. I don't know if that's technically feasible, but maybe it would
> be better to check if a way has been modified since import, independent
> of the tiger:reviewed tag. I guess you could assign those a slightly
> lower priority than the ones that have tiger:reviewed=yes.

You aren't alone. I stopped bothering with tiger:reviewed tags back in
the Potlatch 1 days. It just isn't a well-designed tag:

- not very discoverable to mappers who weren't around in 2008
- not automatic enough
- doesn't say whether the names, classification, or geometry was
reviewed, or whether the review covered the entire way

I think we generally treat tiger:* tags as cruft these days. (I
sometimes use tiger:name_* in cleaning up erroneously merged ways or
ways lossily "unduplicated" along county lines, but that's about it.)

On the other hand, ways without tiger:reviewed tags are more likely to
have been entered by hand or rigorously reviewed, so it does make sense
to reward such ways. But I think it'd be unfortunate to totally discount
tiger:reviewed=no ways.

FWIW, I also leave a lot of usable paved roads as highway=residential in
rural areas, but there are plenty of considerations that vary from
region to region (even within a state).

> On Sat, Jun 13, 2015 at 1:38 PM Richard Fairhurst
> <[hidden email]
> <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>
>     Hi all,
>
>     At State of the Map US last weekend I was really pleased to unveil
>     bicycle routing for the US (and Canada) at my site, cycle.travel
>     <http://cycle.travel>.
>
>     The planner, at http://cycle.travel/map , will plan a bike route for you
>     between any two points - whether in the same city or on opposite sides
>     of the continent. It's all based on OSM data but also takes account of
>     elevation and other factors.
>
>     I "dogfooded" it with a three-day ride around New York state after
>     SOTM-US, and it found me some lovely quiet roads in and around the
>     Catskills. I hope it'll be equally useful for the other two-wheelers
>     amongst us. There's still a lot I want to add (as detailed at
>     http://cycle.travel/news/new_cycle_travel_directions_for_the_us_and_canada)
>     but I hope you enjoy it.
>
>     Plug aside, there's a couple of things might be relevant to US mappers.
>
>
>     First of all, I'm aiming high with this - the aim isn't just to make the
>     best OSM-powered bike router of the US, but the best bike router full
>     stop for commuters, leisure cyclists and tourers. (I leave the
>     "athletes" to Strava!)
>
>     Here in Britain, experience over the years has been that good bike
>     routing and good bike cartography - historically via CycleStreets and
>     OpenCycleMap - are a really effective way of driving contributions to
>     OSM. So if you know cyclists who aren't yet contributing to OSM, maybe
>     throw this at them - and if it doesn't find the route they'd recommend,
>     maybe there's some unmapped infrastructure they could be persuaded
>     to add!
>
>
>     Second, the routing and cartography both heavily distrust unreviewed
>     TIGER.
>
>     In other words, it won't route over a rural road tagged as
>              highway=residential
>              tiger:reviewed=no
>
>     Any road with tiger:reviewed removed or altered, any road in urban
>     areas, and any road with highway=unclassified or greater is assumed to
>     be a usable paved road. (There are a few additional bits of logic but
>     that's the general principle.)
>
>     Unreviewed rural residentials are shown on the map (high zoom levels) as
>     a faint grey dashed line, explained in the key as "Unsurveyed road".
>
>     I've been finding this a really useful way of locating unreviewed TIGER
>     and fixing it... it's actually quite addictive. :) Looking for roads
>     which cross rivers, or with long sweeping curves, is an easy way of
>     identifying quick wins. My modus operandi is to retag 2+-lane roads with
>     painted centrelines as tertiary, smaller paved roads as unclassified,
>     and just to take the tiger:reviewed tag off paved residential roads.
>     Anything unpaved gets a surface tag and/or highway=track.
>
>     I can't promise minutely updates I'm afraid - the routing/map update
>     process takes two full days to run so it'll be more monthly than
>     minutely. But I hope you find it as useful as I do. You'll see there's a
>     tiny little "pen" icon at the bottom right of http://cycle.travel/map
>     which takes you to edit the current location in OSM.
>
>
>     Finally, many thanks to everyone who's tested it so far, particularly
>     Steve All - your feedback was and continues to be enormously useful.
>
>     cheers
>     Richard
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     Talk-us mailing list
>     [hidden email]
>     <mailto:[hidden email]>
>     https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-us mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>


--
[hidden email]


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

Re: cycle.travel US bike routing, and unreviewed rural TIGER

Richard Fairhurst
In reply to this post by Harald Kliems
Harald Kliems wrote:
> Very nice, Richard! One quick comment: I might not be the only
> who doesn't always change the tiger:reviewed tag when fixing
> TIGER-imported roads. I don't know if that's technically feasible,
> but maybe it would be better to check if a way has been modified
> since import, independent of the tiger:reviewed tag.

Absolutely. I did consider this and it's very feasible - osm2pgsql can tell you the user who last modified a way, and if it's DaveHansenTiger or woodpeck-fixbot, you can presume it's unmodified.

Unfortunately, there are way too many false positives. Partly this is consequential damage (in particular, ways which have been split) but also bulk edits - for example, in several of states, people have assigned (say) maxspeed=35mph to all ways matching certain criteria, including dirt tracks tagged as highway=residential. This means the last editor is no guarantee that a residential is actually a usable paved road.

After a few experiments (and I've been working on this all year, pretty much) I concluded that the tiger:reviewed tag is the only way of doing it. I'd restate that I'm only using this on rural residentials - anything unclassified or higher, or in an urban area, is assumed ok. Personally I have F6 assigned as a shortcut key in P2 for highway=unclassified for ease of quick retagging. :)

cheers
Richard

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: cycle.travel US bike routing, and unreviewed rural TIGER

Harald Kliems
Well, you've certainly motivated me to from now on always modify the tiger:reviewed tag :-)
Thanks again for your efforts!
On Sun, Jun 14, 2015 at 2:38 PM Richard Fairhurst <[hidden email]> wrote:
Harald Kliems wrote:
> Very nice, Richard! One quick comment: I might not be the only
> who doesn't always change the tiger:reviewed tag when fixing
> TIGER-imported roads. I don't know if that's technically feasible,
> but maybe it would be better to check if a way has been modified
> since import, independent of the tiger:reviewed tag.

Absolutely. I did consider this and it's very feasible - osm2pgsql can tell
you the user who last modified a way, and if it's DaveHansenTiger or
woodpeck-fixbot, you can presume it's unmodified.

Unfortunately, there are way too many false positives. Partly this is
consequential damage (in particular, ways which have been split) but also
bulk edits - for example, in several of states, people have assigned (say)
maxspeed=35mph to all ways matching certain criteria, including dirt tracks
tagged as highway=residential. This means the last editor is no guarantee
that a residential is actually a usable paved road.

After a few experiments (and I've been working on this all year, pretty
much) I concluded that the tiger:reviewed tag is the only way of doing it.
I'd restate that I'm only using this on rural residentials - anything
unclassified or higher, or in an urban area, is assumed ok. Personally I
have F6 assigned as a shortcut key in P2 for highway=unclassified for ease
of quick retagging. :)

cheers
Richard





--
View this message in context: http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/cycle-travel-US-bike-routing-and-unreviewed-rural-TIGER-tp5848084p5848141.html
Sent from the USA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

_______________________________________________
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: cycle.travel US bike routing, and unreviewed rural TIGER

Paul Norman
On 6/14/2015 2:24 PM, Harald Kliems wrote:
> Well, you've certainly motivated me to from now on always modify the
> tiger:reviewed tag :-)
> Thanks again for your efforts!

The most important change is probably setting appropriate surface
information. I don't know the exact secret sauce magic of cycle.travel,
but surface information is very important for selecting reasonable
routes on a bike - or indeed, any non-foot method of transportation.

Also, keep in mind, most rural highway=residential from TIGER should be
either highway=unclassified, highway=track, highway=service, or deleted.

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

Re: cycle.travel US bike routing, and unreviewed rural TIGER

OSM Volunteer stevea
Paul Norman writes:
>The most important change is probably setting appropriate surface
>information. I don't know the exact secret sauce magic of
>cycle.travel, but surface information is very important for
>selecting reasonable routes on a bike - or indeed, any non-foot
>method of transportation.
>
>Also, keep in mind, most rural highway=residential from TIGER should
>be either highway=unclassified, highway=track, highway=service, or
>deleted.

EXCELLENT points, BOTH of these, Paul.  Unfortunately, surface tags
are not especially widespread (in the USA, where I am familiar), but
where found, they do make excellent choice points in bicycle routing
logic.

Richard (Fairhurst), if cycle.travel/map's router logic is not paying
attention to surface= tags, perhaps it should, as doing so truly can
improve selected routes.  (Not that isn't a fine router already!)

Who knows, it's possible, even likely that OSM gets lots of new
surface tagging if we have a router that pays attention.  (Data feeds
usage, usage feeds data, ad infinitum).

SteveA
California

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

Re: cycle.travel US bike routing, and unreviewed rural TIGER

Richard Fairhurst
SteveA wrote:
> Richard (Fairhurst), if cycle.travel/map's router logic is not
> paying attention to surface= tags, perhaps it should, as
> doing so truly can improve selected routes

It very much does - it'll look at surface=, and failing that tracktype= or smoothness=, as one of the principal criteria for "how cyclable is this?". I've suffered on too many bumpy dirt paths in my time to let that one past!

cheers
Richard

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: cycle.travel US bike routing, and unreviewed rural TIGER

Russ Nelson
In reply to this post by Minh Nguyen-2
Minh Nguyen writes:
 > You aren't alone. I stopped bothering with tiger:reviewed tags back in
 > the Potlatch 1 days. It just isn't a well-designed tag:
 >
 > - not very discoverable to mappers who weren't around in 2008

Makes ways a sickly yellow if you edit using JOSM.

 > - doesn't say whether the names, classification, or geometry was
 > reviewed, or whether the review covered the entire way

I remove it when I've checked (usually via field survey, but sometimes
when someone else that I know has been there) that the name is
correct, and ensured that the geometry is correct. I used to just
remove tiger:reviewed, but now I remove all the tiger: tags.

 > But I think it'd be unfortunate to totally discount
 > tiger:reviewed=no ways.

I think the usual thing to do is check to see if DaveHansenTiger is
still the owner.

--
--my blog is at    http://blog.russnelson.com
Crynwr supports open source software
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315-600-8815
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213  |     Sheepdog      

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

Re: cycle.travel US bike routing, and unreviewed rural TIGER

Richard Fairhurst
Just as a postscript to this discussion I thought I'd cite an example area. If you look here, in Georgia:

   http://cycle.travel/map?lat=31.9023&lon=-84.0398&zoom=14

you'll see that most of the roads are unreviewed TIGER residentials. Of those, these are adjacent to each other:

http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/9359782 - good tarmac, should be highway=tertiary
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/9359913 - unpaved road; highway=unclassified, surface=unpaved
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/9359784 - probably tertiary, but lousy geometry at the S
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/9359783 - whoops, where did the connectivity go?

All of this is trivially fixable but right now there's no way of using them for routing or sensible cartography. Do dive in - the cycle.travel rendering makes it obvious which bits need fixing, and you learn to identify the roads which are likely to be paved through roads and therefore targets to fix. It's quite good fun. :)

cheers
Richard

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: cycle.travel US bike routing, and unreviewed rural TIGER

Harald Kliems
Richard, I would somewhat caution against penalizing unpaved roads too much. In many areas of the US they actually make wonderful cycling routes, whereas the paved alternatives are high traffic and unpleasant to ride on. Of course, proper smoothness tagging would help but that will be a long way coming. Until then you could consider a user setting to avoid/not avoid unpaved roads.
 Harald.

On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 2:48 PM Richard Fairhurst <[hidden email]> wrote:
Just as a postscript to this discussion I thought I'd cite an example area.
If you look here, in Georgia:

   http://cycle.travel/map?lat=31.9023&lon=-84.0398&zoom=14

you'll see that most of the roads are unreviewed TIGER residentials. Of
those, these are adjacent to each other:

http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/9359782 - good tarmac, should be
highway=tertiary
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/9359913 - unpaved road;
highway=unclassified, surface=unpaved
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/9359784 - probably tertiary, but lousy
geometry at the S
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/9359783 - whoops, where did the
connectivity go?

All of this is trivially fixable but right now there's no way of using them
for routing or sensible cartography. Do dive in - the cycle.travel rendering
makes it obvious which bits need fixing, and you learn to identify the roads
which are likely to be paved through roads and therefore targets to fix.
It's quite good fun. :)

cheers
Richard





--
View this message in context: http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/cycle-travel-US-bike-routing-and-unreviewed-rural-TIGER-tp5848084p5848589.html
Sent from the USA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

_______________________________________________
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: cycle.travel US bike routing, and unreviewed rural TIGER

Richard Fairhurst
Harald Kliems wrote:
> Until then you could consider a user setting to avoid/not avoid
> unpaved roads.

Unfortunately contraction hierarchies - the routing algorithm used by OSRM - don't really allow user settings. For each distinct routing profile, you need to regenerate the routing graph, which takes (many) hours and requires (many) GB of RAM both to route and to host.

cycle.travel penalises surface types variably: surface=mud gets a big penalty, surface=gravel not so much.

cheers
Richard

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: cycle.travel US bike routing, and unreviewed rural TIGER

Russ Nelson
In reply to this post by Harald Kliems
There's really two kinds of cycling: including trails and unpaved
roads because your bicycle has nobblies and springs, and not. The
first are fine with such roads, and the second very much not. I've
done both types of cycling, and with high pressure narrow tyres
(that's a nod to Richard, so he feels more at home here), gravel roads
are worse than a boot to the head.

Harald Kliems writes:
 > Richard, I would somewhat caution against penalizing unpaved roads too
 > much. In many areas of the US they actually make wonderful cycling routes,
 > whereas the paved alternatives are high traffic and unpleasant to ride on.
 > Of course, proper smoothness tagging would help but that will be a long way
 > coming. Until then you could consider a user setting to avoid/not avoid
 > unpaved roads.
 >  Harald.
 >
 > On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 2:48 PM Richard Fairhurst <[hidden email]>
 > wrote:
 >
 > > Just as a postscript to this discussion I thought I'd cite an example area.
 > > If you look here, in Georgia:
 > >
 > >    http://cycle.travel/map?lat=31.9023&lon=-84.0398&zoom=14
 > >
 > > you'll see that most of the roads are unreviewed TIGER residentials. Of
 > > those, these are adjacent to each other:
 > >
 > > http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/9359782 - good tarmac, should be
 > > highway=tertiary
 > > http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/9359913 - unpaved road;
 > > highway=unclassified, surface=unpaved
 > > http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/9359784 - probably tertiary, but lousy
 > > geometry at the S
 > > http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/9359783 - whoops, where did the
 > > connectivity go?
 > >
 > > All of this is trivially fixable but right now there's no way of using them
 > > for routing or sensible cartography. Do dive in - the cycle.travel
 > > rendering
 > > makes it obvious which bits need fixing, and you learn to identify the
 > > roads
 > > which are likely to be paved through roads and therefore targets to fix.
 > > It's quite good fun. :)
 > >
 > > cheers
 > > Richard
 > >
 > >
 > >
 > >
 > >
 > > --
 > > View this message in context:
 > > http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/cycle-travel-US-bike-routing-and-unreviewed-rural-TIGER-tp5848084p5848589.html
 > > Sent from the USA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
 > >
 > > _______________________________________________
 > > Talk-us mailing list
 > > [hidden email]
 > > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
 > >
 > <div dir="ltr">Richard, I would somewhat caution against penalizing unpaved roads too much. In many areas of the US they actually make wonderful cycling routes, whereas the paved alternatives are high traffic and unpleasant to ride on. Of course, proper smoothness tagging would help but that will be a long way coming. Until then you could consider a user setting to avoid/not avoid unpaved roads.<br><div> Harald.</div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr">On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 2:48 PM Richard Fairhurst &lt;<a href="mailto:[hidden email]">[hidden email]</a>&gt; wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Just as a postscript to this discussion I thought I&#39;d cite an example area.<br>
 > If you look here, in Georgia:<br>
 > <br>
 >    <a href="http://cycle.travel/map?lat=31.9023&amp;lon=-84.0398&amp;zoom=14" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://cycle.travel/map?lat=31.9023&amp;lon=-84.0398&amp;zoom=14</a><br>
 > <br>
 > you&#39;ll see that most of the roads are unreviewed TIGER residentials. Of<br>
 > those, these are adjacent to each other:<br>
 > <br>
 > <a href="http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/9359782" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/9359782</a> - good tarmac, should be<br>
 > highway=tertiary<br>
 > <a href="http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/9359913" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/9359913</a> - unpaved road;<br>
 > highway=unclassified, surface=unpaved<br>
 > <a href="http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/9359784" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/9359784</a> - probably tertiary, but lousy<br>
 > geometry at the S<br>
 > <a href="http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/9359783" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/9359783</a> - whoops, where did the<br>
 > connectivity go?<br>
 > <br>
 > All of this is trivially fixable but right now there&#39;s no way of using them<br>
 > for routing or sensible cartography. Do dive in - the <a href="http://cycle.travel" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">cycle.travel</a> rendering<br>
 > makes it obvious which bits need fixing, and you learn to identify the roads<br>
 > which are likely to be paved through roads and therefore targets to fix.<br>
 > It&#39;s quite good fun. :)<br>
 > <br>
 > cheers<br>
 > Richard<br>
 > <br>
 > <br>
 > <br>
 > <br>
 > <br>
 > --<br>
 > View this message in context: <a href="http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/cycle-travel-US-bike-routing-and-unreviewed-rural-TIGER-tp5848084p5848589.html" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/cycle-travel-US-bike-routing-and-unreviewed-rural-TIGER-tp5848084p5848589.html</a><br>
 > Sent from the USA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.<br>
 > <br>
 > _______________________________________________<br>
 > Talk-us mailing list<br>
 > <a href="mailto:[hidden email]" target="_blank">[hidden email]</a><br>
 > <a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us</a><br>
 > </blockquote></div>
 > _______________________________________________
 > 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: cycle.travel US bike routing, and unreviewed rural TIGER

brycenesbitt
In other words, it won't route over a rural road tagged as
        highway=residential
        tiger:reviewed=no

Most of the well reviewed Tiger I see still has this tag.
People don't know to delete it.  The automatic delete on edit does not apply to tiger:reviewed (it applies to a Tiger tag I wish was kept instead!).

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

Re: cycle.travel US bike routing, and unreviewed rural TIGER

Jack Burke-2
Usually I change it to =yes instead of just deleting it. The main reason is I frequently use ITOworld maps to review the county I live in to find unreviewed roads, and I like the color pattern better that way.

-jack

On June 22, 2015 2:46:36 AM EDT, Bryce Nesbitt <[hidden email]> wrote:
In other words, it won't route over a rural road tagged as
        highway=residential
        tiger:reviewed=no

Most of the well reviewed Tiger I see still has this tag.
People don't know to delete it.  The automatic delete on edit does not apply to tiger:reviewed (it applies to a Tiger tag I wish was kept instead!).



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

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

Re: cycle.travel US bike routing, and unreviewed rural TIGER

Bryan Housel
In reply to this post by brycenesbitt
I’m considering whether it makes sense to remove the `tiger:reviewed=no` tag when a user performs certain edits in iD.



On Jun 22, 2015, at 2:46 AM, Bryce Nesbitt <[hidden email]> wrote:

In other words, it won't route over a rural road tagged as
        highway=residential
        tiger:reviewed=no

Most of the well reviewed Tiger I see still has this tag.
People don't know to delete it.  The automatic delete on edit does not apply to tiger:reviewed (it applies to a Tiger tag I wish was kept instead!).
_______________________________________________
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: cycle.travel US bike routing, and unreviewed rural TIGER

Jack Burke-2
In reply to this post by Richard Fairhurst
So, just for fun, I'm going through the area you pointed out and fixing some of the roads. I'm making some of those Unclassified instead of Tertiary because they go from nowhere to nowhere, but feel free to change them.

I plan on making a road trip in a few weeks, and depending on timing and weather, I might make a detour through that area and capture a random sampling of those roads in Mapillary.

-jack


On June 19, 2015 3:47:22 PM EDT, Richard Fairhurst <[hidden email]> wrote:
Just as a postscript to this discussion I thought I'd cite an example area.
If you look here, in Georgia:

http://cycle.travel/map?lat=31.9023&lon=-84.0398&zoom=14

you'll see that most of the roads are unreviewed TIGER residentials. Of
those, these are adjacent to each other:

http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/9359782 - good tarmac, should be
highway=tertiary
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/9359913 - unpaved road;
highway=unclassified, surface=unpaved
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/9359784 - probably tertiary, but lousy
geometry at the S
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/9359783 - whoops, where did the
connectivity go?

All of this is trivially fixable but right now there's no way of using them
for routing or sensible cartography. Do dive in - the cycle.travel rendering
makes it obvious which bits need fixing, and you learn to identify the roads
which are likely to be paved through roads and therefore targets to fix.
It's quite good fun. :)

cheers
Richard





--
View this message in context: http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/cycle-travel-US-bike-routing-and-unreviewed-rural-TIGER-tp5848084p5848589.html
Sent from the USA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.



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

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

Re: cycle.travel US bike routing, and unreviewed rural TIGER

Phil! Gold
In reply to this post by Jack Burke-2
* Jack Burke <[hidden email]> [2015-06-22 08:32 -0400]:
> On June 22, 2015 2:46:36 AM EDT, Bryce Nesbitt <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >>         tiger:reviewed=no
> >
> >Most of the well reviewed Tiger I see still has this tag.
> >People don't know to delete it.
>
> Usually I change it to =yes instead of just deleting it. The main reason
> is I frequently use ITOworld maps to review the county I live in to find
> unreviewed roads, and I like the color pattern better that way.

Hm.  Maybe I'll start doing that.  I also use tiger:reviewed=position to
signify that I've armchair-mapped the way to align with aerial imagery but
haven't yet been out to verify the road name.  (Details about my use of
this tag are in this diary entry:

  http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/asciiphil/diary/16247

)

--
...computer contrarian of the first order... / http://aperiodic.net/phil/
PGP: 026A27F2  print: D200 5BDB FC4B B24A 9248  9F7A 4322 2D22 026A 27F2
--- --
NOTICE:
        Anyone seen smoking will be assumed to be on fire and will
        be summarily put out.
---- --- --

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