highway=* + area=yes vs area:highway=*

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

highway=* + area=yes vs area:highway=*

Tomasz Wójcik
As highway=footway etc. tags are set to "should not be used on areas" on Wiki, and mapping them in combination with area=yes is not documented at all and considered as wrong tagging by part of users, there is a key "area:highway=*" (133k uses at the moment). Part of users still map footway areas as a combination anyway, propably because it's rendered by default style. Due to our rules, that we shouldn't have 2 active tagging schemes for the same feature, so we should discuss this topic. 

I vote for area:highway=* key, because it's simpler, and it gives a possibility to show also street areas with crossings in the future.

* Wiki with specyfications of a:h=* for certain keys: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:area:highway
* area:highway=* visualisation: http://osmapa.pl/w/area


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

Re: highway=* + area=yes vs area:highway=*

djakk
I don’t get why highway=footway + area=yes is considered as wrong tagging !


djakk



Le mer. 8 août 2018 à 12:52, Tomasz Wójcik <[hidden email]> a écrit :
As highway=footway etc. tags are set to "should not be used on areas" on Wiki, and mapping them in combination with area=yes is not documented at all and considered as wrong tagging by part of users, there is a key "area:highway=*" (133k uses at the moment). Part of users still map footway areas as a combination anyway, propably because it's rendered by default style. Due to our rules, that we shouldn't have 2 active tagging schemes for the same feature, so we should discuss this topic. 

I vote for area:highway=* key, because it's simpler, and it gives a possibility to show also street areas with crossings in the future.

* Wiki with specyfications of a:h=* for certain keys: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:area:highway
* area:highway=* visualisation: http://osmapa.pl/w/area

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

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

Re: highway=* + area=yes vs area:highway=*

john whelan-2
> I don’t get why highway=footway + area=yes is considered as wrong tagging !

The problem is consistency.  If the renderers and routers don't understand your tagging then it is less visible.

Cheerio John

On 8 August 2018 at 08:40, djakk djakk <[hidden email]> wrote:
I don’t get why highway=footway + area=yes is considered as wrong tagging !


djakk



Le mer. 8 août 2018 à 12:52, Tomasz Wójcik <[hidden email]> a écrit :
As highway=footway etc. tags are set to "should not be used on areas" on Wiki, and mapping them in combination with area=yes is not documented at all and considered as wrong tagging by part of users, there is a key "area:highway=*" (133k uses at the moment). Part of users still map footway areas as a combination anyway, propably because it's rendered by default style. Due to our rules, that we shouldn't have 2 active tagging schemes for the same feature, so we should discuss this topic. 

I vote for area:highway=* key, because it's simpler, and it gives a possibility to show also street areas with crossings in the future.

* Wiki with specyfications of a:h=* for certain keys: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:area:highway
* area:highway=* visualisation: http://osmapa.pl/w/area

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

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



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

Re: highway=* + area=yes vs area:highway=*

David Fox
In reply to this post by Tomasz Wójcik
Hi

Overpass query in Greater London:
nwr["highway"~"footway|cycleway|path|pedestrian"][area=yes] = 1949
nwr["area:highway"~"footway|cycleway|path|pedestrian"] = 40

If I see a highway=footway + area=yes, I always convert it to highway=pedestrian + area=yes, which is documented in the wiki & renders on the 'standard' map.

I would be happy to see highway=footway + area=yes not render. It would speed up the conversion rate.

Having the most instances isn't a reason not to change the tagging scheme, but there has to be a justifiable reason; an improvement in usability. Concatenating keys doesn't do that.

Cheers
DaveF

On 08/08/2018 11:49, Tomasz Wójcik wrote:
As highway=footway etc. tags are set to "should not be used on areas" on Wiki, and mapping them in combination with area=yes is not documented at all and considered as wrong tagging by part of users, there is a key "area:highway=*" (133k uses at the moment). Part of users still map footway areas as a combination anyway, propably because it's rendered by default style. Due to our rules, that we shouldn't have 2 active tagging schemes for the same feature, so we should discuss this topic. 

I vote for area:highway=* key, because it's simpler, and it gives a possibility to show also street areas with crossings in the future.

* Wiki with specyfications of a:h=* for certain keys: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:area:highway
* area:highway=* visualisation: http://osmapa.pl/w/area



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


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

Re: highway=* + area=yes vs area:highway=*

Maarten Deen
In reply to this post by john whelan-2
Then I still don't understand the problem. A closed way tagged with
highway=* will by default route. A closed way with area:highway=* will
not. You'll have to introduce logic in the router to do so.

Regards,
Maarten

On 2018-08-08 14:49, john whelan wrote:

>> I don’t get why highway=footway + area=yes is considered as wrong
> tagging !
>
> The problem is consistency.  If the renderers and routers don't
> understand your tagging then it is less visible.
>
> Cheerio John
>
> On 8 August 2018 at 08:40, djakk djakk <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> I don’t get why highway=footway + area=yes is considered as wrong
>> tagging !
>>
>> djakk
>>
>> Le mer. 8 août 2018 à 12:52, Tomasz Wójcik <[hidden email]> a
>> écrit :
>>
>>> As highway=footway etc. tags are set to "should not be used on
>>> areas" on Wiki, and mapping them in combination with area=yes is
>>> not documented at all and considered as wrong tagging by part of
>>> users, there is a key "area:highway=*" (133k uses at the moment).
>>> Part of users still map footway areas as a combination anyway,
>>> propably because it's rendered by default style. Due to our rules,
>>> that we shouldn't have 2 active tagging schemes for the same
>>> feature, so we should discuss this topic.
>>>
>>> I vote for area:highway=* key, because it's simpler, and it gives
>>> a possibility to show also street areas with crossings in the
>>> future.
>>>
>>> * Wiki with specyfications of a:h=* for certain keys:
>>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:area:highway [1]
>>> * TagInfo: https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/area:highway [2]
>>> * area:highway=* visualisation: http://osmapa.pl/w/area [3]
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> talk mailing list
>>> [hidden email]
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk [4]
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> talk mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk [4]
>
>
>
> Links:
> ------
> [1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:area:highway
> [2] https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/area:highway
> [3] http://osmapa.pl/w/area
> [4] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
> _______________________________________________
> talk mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

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

Re: highway=* + area=yes vs area:highway=*

Tom Pfeifer
In reply to this post by Tomasz Wójcik
On 08.08.2018 12:49, Tomasz Wójcik wrote:
> As highway=footway etc. tags are set to "should not be used on areas" on Wiki, and mapping them in
> combination with area=yes is not documented at all and considered as wrong tagging by part of users,
> there is a key "area:highway=*" (133k uses at the moment). Part of users still map footway areas as
> a combination anyway, propably because it's rendered by default style. Due to our rules, that we
> shouldn't have 2 active tagging schemes for the same feature, so we should discuss this topic.

There is nothing on the wiki page that explicitly discourages or deprecates the use of highway tags
on an area, except the flag in the template that defines that a closed loop means it is not filled,
in the absence of other tagging.

area=yes is the traditional tagging then to distinguish a closed loop from an filled area.

"some closed ways ... are assumed to be areas, but others, such as highway=footway are not, being
treated as linear features instead, except when there is also an area=yes tag." [1]

"The area=yes tag is required for some closed ways when used to define an Area (polygon)"

area=yes is used nearly a million times, 300k with highway*

area=yes and highway:area=* have different purposes, the first for the occasional filled polygon,
the latter for systematically mapping highway width and shape.

Thus, area=yes is _well_ documented, and I see no reason to change that.

[1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Area
[2] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:area

tom

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

Re: highway=* + area=yes vs area:highway=*

dieterdreist
In reply to this post by Tomasz Wójcik


sent from a phone

> On 8. Aug 2018, at 12:49, Tomasz Wójcik <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Due to our rules, that we shouldn't have 2 active tagging schemes for the same feature, so we should discuss this topic.


can you point me to this rule? Is it documented somewhere? While I agree it is preferable to not have different tags for the exact same meaning, it is still occurring with a fee tags and there isn’t a huge problem with it (compared to having the same tag with different intended meaning).

Btw: in the beginning it was rather common to have different values with the same meaning, e.g. yes, true and 1.

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

Re: highway=* + area=yes vs area:highway=*

dieterdreist
In reply to this post by djakk


sent from a phone

> On 8. Aug 2018, at 14:40, djakk djakk <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> I don’t get why highway=footway + area=yes is considered as wrong tagging !



because an area is not a “way”, a way implies linearity.


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

Re: highway=* + area=yes vs area:highway=*

lsces
In reply to this post by Tomasz Wójcik
On 08/08/18 11:49, Tomasz Wójcik wrote:

> As highway=footway etc. tags are set to "should not be used on areas" on
> Wiki, and mapping them in combination with area=yes is not documented at
> all and considered as wrong tagging by part of users, there is a key
> "area:highway=*" (133k uses at the moment). Part of users still map
> footway areas as a combination anyway, propably because it's rendered by
> default style. Due to our rules, that we shouldn't have 2 active tagging
> schemes for the same feature, so we should discuss this topic.
>
> I vote for area:highway=* key, because it's simpler, and it gives a
> possibility to show also street areas with crossings in the future.
>
> * Wiki with specyfications of a:h=* for certain keys:
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:area:highway
> * TagInfo: https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/area:highway
> * area:highway=* visualisation: http://osmapa.pl/w/area

As more and more detail is added to the data, the switch from
'macro-mapping' to 'micro-mapping' needs to be considered. There has
been some discussion on park areas being 'footpaths where you can walk
anywhere', so rather than creating multiple ways covering all
combinations of access points, a pedestrian router would understand that
they can enter and exit the area at any valid gateway. I don't know if
any routing software actually does use this approach. Boats on lakes
have a similar problem ... so at a macro-mapping level a waterway or
highway can have a sensible reason for being an area.

Switching to micro-mapping which is starting to expand, one has areas
for each facet of a route. Footpaths, grass verges, roadway, private
drives off the roadway across verge and path and so on. There is however
no current method of converting all of these area elements into 'ways',
so one needs additional highway=xxx ways to provide the routing
information that provides the macro level view. So you do not want an
'area:highway=footpath' if there is a highway='road with footpaths' way
that covers the same object ...

--
Lester Caine - G8HFL
-----------------------------
Contact - https://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact
L.S.Caine Electronic Services - https://lsces.co.uk
EnquirySolve - https://enquirysolve.com/
Model Engineers Digital Workshop - https://medw.co.uk
Rainbow Digital Media - https://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk

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

Re: highway=* + area=yes vs area:highway=*

Tordanik
In reply to this post by Tomasz Wójcik
On 08.08.2018 12:49, Tomasz Wójcik wrote:
> Due to our rules, that we shouldn't have 2 active tagging
> schemes for the same feature

These tagging schemes are for 2 different real-world features:
* roads/paths (i.e. linear features with a direction)
* plazas/squares (i.e. open areas where people will walk across in all
directions)

Linear roads/paths are mapped as highway=* ways, optionally with an
additional area:highway=* polygon.

Plazas/squares are mapped as highway=* + area=yes polygons.

So the area:highway key is never an alternative to highway polygons with
area=yes! In any given situation, only one or the other will be correct.

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

Re: highway=* + area=yes vs area:highway=*

djakk
A linear road is also a surface, the surface is useless at zoom=8 but useful at zoom=16. 
Like waterways, both can coexist. 

djakk



Le mer. 8 août 2018 à 18:19, Tobias Knerr <[hidden email]> a écrit :
On 08.08.2018 12:49, Tomasz Wójcik wrote:
> Due to our rules, that we shouldn't have 2 active tagging
> schemes for the same feature

These tagging schemes are for 2 different real-world features:
* roads/paths (i.e. linear features with a direction)
* plazas/squares (i.e. open areas where people will walk across in all
directions)

Linear roads/paths are mapped as highway=* ways, optionally with an
additional area:highway=* polygon.

Plazas/squares are mapped as highway=* + area=yes polygons.

So the area:highway key is never an alternative to highway polygons with
area=yes! In any given situation, only one or the other will be correct.

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

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

Re: highway=* + area=yes vs area:highway=*

Darafei "Komяpa" Praliaskouski

area:highway= to highway= is what waterway=riverbank to waterway=river.

The first is area used to understand the curvature of the edge, the second is a routable way. They denote different things and aren't interchangeable.

As with rivers, it's expected that lines are mapped first, and on top of those detailed polygons are overlaid later.


ср, 8 авг. 2018 г. в 20:11, djakk djakk <[hidden email]>:
A linear road is also a surface, the surface is useless at zoom=8 but useful at zoom=16. 
Like waterways, both can coexist. 

djakk



Le mer. 8 août 2018 à 18:19, Tobias Knerr <[hidden email]> a écrit :
On 08.08.2018 12:49, Tomasz Wójcik wrote:
> Due to our rules, that we shouldn't have 2 active tagging
> schemes for the same feature

These tagging schemes are for 2 different real-world features:
* roads/paths (i.e. linear features with a direction)
* plazas/squares (i.e. open areas where people will walk across in all
directions)

Linear roads/paths are mapped as highway=* ways, optionally with an
additional area:highway=* polygon.

Plazas/squares are mapped as highway=* + area=yes polygons.

So the area:highway key is never an alternative to highway polygons with
area=yes! In any given situation, only one or the other will be correct.

_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
--
Darafei Praliaskouski
Support me: http://patreon.com/komzpa

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

Re: highway=* + area=yes vs area:highway=*

dieterdreist
In reply to this post by Tordanik


sent from a phone

> On 8. Aug 2018, at 18:17, Tobias Knerr <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Linear roads/paths are mapped as highway=* ways, optionally with an
> additional area:highway=* polygon.
>
> Plazas/squares are mapped as highway=* + area=yes polygons.


+1
it isn’t clear though, whether area:highway can be applied to the second type (square) as well (I would think it can).

cheers,

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

Re: highway=* + area=yes vs area:highway=*

Tomasz Wójcik
In reply to this post by dieterdreist
So basing on your opinions, it looks like highway=* + area=yes isn't
incorrect, it's just not documented. What do you guys think about adding
a better documentation of combination with area=yes to some of highway=*
Wiki pages?


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

Re: highway=* + area=yes vs area:highway=*

Andy Townsend

> So basing on your opinions, it looks like highway=* + area=yes isn't  incorrect, it's just not documented.

I'd suggest that it depends what you're mapping. If it's a predominantly linear feature then it would be wrong to try and "somehow record the width" using area=yes on the highway tag - use area:highway (or width) for that.

If it really is an area, then area=yes would make sense.  Most highways are not, though.

Best Regards,
Andy


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

Re: highway=* + area=yes vs area:highway=*

djakk
No, all highways are areas :) Mapping them as a line is a manual generalization ;)


djakk


Le ven. 10 août 2018 à 12:15, Andy Townsend <[hidden email]> a écrit :

> So basing on your opinions, it looks like highway=* + area=yes isn't  incorrect, it's just not documented.

I'd suggest that it depends what you're mapping. If it's a predominantly linear feature then it would be wrong to try and "somehow record the width" using area=yes on the highway tag - use area:highway (or width) for that.

If it really is an area, then area=yes would make sense.  Most highways are not, though.

Best Regards,
Andy



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

Re: highway=* + area=yes vs area:highway=*

Tom Pfeifer
On 10.08.2018 13:20, djakk djakk wrote:
> No, all highways are areas :) Mapping them as a line is a manual generalization ;)

1., yes. 2., no, it is a mental abstraction, necessary to apply the mathematical graph theory for
routing.

On 10.08.2018 12:02, Tomasz Wójcik wrote:
 > ... it looks like highway=* + area=yes isn't incorrect, it's just not documented.

As said before, it was documented already on the area=* page. It might need to be more explicit on
the highway pages.

tom

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

Re: Odp: Re: highway=* + area=yes vs area:highway=*

Colin Smale

On 2018-08-10 14:01, marekskleciak wrote:

We have also mechanism for area routing but, that's true graphs are easier..
 
Do you have any links/references for area routing? What "mechanism" are you thinking of here?
 

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

Re: highway=* + area=yes vs area:highway=*

dieterdreist
In reply to this post by Tomasz Wójcik


sent from a phone

> On 10. Aug 2018, at 12:02, Tomasz Wójcik <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> So basing on your opinions, it looks like highway=* + area=yes isn't incorrect, it's just not documented.


I believe it is documented. It means a traffic area (omnidirectional) as opposed to a street (linear). It doesn’t make sense to use highway=secondary (for instance) with area=yes, because secondary is a network importance class and a traffic area will always have very low importance for the network.


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

Re: highway=* + area=yes vs area:highway=*

Paul Johnson-3
In reply to this post by Tomasz Wójcik
Sounds fine by me.  Seems there's a decent sized contingency working the wiki independently of how things are actually tagged anymore, it's been getting hard to point to the wiki as a usable reference for a couple years now. 

On Fri, Aug 10, 2018, 05:08 Tomasz Wójcik <[hidden email]> wrote:
So basing on your opinions, it looks like highway=* + area=yes isn't
incorrect, it's just not documented. What do you guys think about adding
a better documentation of combination with area=yes to some of highway=*
Wiki pages?


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

_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
12