Quantcast

"toll" related tags appropriate for park entrances?

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
9 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

"toll" related tags appropriate for park entrances?

Jack Burke-2
Are the various "toll" related tags appropriate for park entrances where you have to stop and pay a fee?  For example, most state parks in Georgia have a "parking fee" that you have to pay to an attendant when you enter the park, so it seems appropriate to tag the collection point as barrier=toll_booth, because you can't pass through if you don't pay.

I realize that "fee" (or parking_fee) is a more appropriate term to use, but "barrier=fee_booth" (or fee anything) doesn't appear to have any usage whatsoever according to taginfo, and I don't think inventing a new value is necessary.

--jack


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

Re: "toll" related tags appropriate for park entrances?

OSM Volunteer stevea
> Are the various "toll" related tags appropriate for park entrances where you have to stop and pay a fee?  For example, most state parks in Georgia have a "parking fee" that you have to pay to an attendant when you enter the park, so it seems appropriate to tag the collection point as barrier=toll_booth, because you can't pass through if you don't pay.
>
> I realize that "fee" (or parking_fee) is a more appropriate term to use, but "barrier=fee_booth" (or fee anything) doesn't appear to have any usage whatsoever according to taginfo, and I don't think inventing a new value is necessary.

I tagged barrier=toll_booth on numerous "exit lanes" at the parking facility at San Diego International Airport.  I also used this tag at a state park near me which has exactly the same sort of entrance attendant you mention collecting what is really a "park usage fee for those who drive in" but it is called a "parking fee."

It seems to perfectly capture the semantic we wish to express.

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

Re: "toll" related tags appropriate for park entrances?

Jack Burke-2
Thanks for the feedback, Steve!  That's kinda what I was thinking, but wanted another opinion.

--jack


On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 12:56 PM, OSM Volunteer stevea <[hidden email]> wrote:
I tagged barrier=toll_booth on numerous "exit lanes" at the parking facility at San Diego International Airport.  I also used this tag at a state park near me which has exactly the same sort of entrance attendant you mention collecting what is really a "park usage fee for those who drive in" but it is called a "parking fee."

It seems to perfectly capture the semantic we wish to express.

SteveA
California


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

Re: "toll" related tags appropriate for park entrances?

Shawn K. Quinn
In reply to this post by OSM Volunteer stevea
On 03/21/2017 11:56 AM, OSM Volunteer stevea wrote:
> I tagged barrier=toll_booth on numerous "exit lanes" at the parking
> facility at San Diego International Airport.  I also used this tag
> at a state park near me which has exactly the same sort of entrance
> attendant you mention collecting what is really a "park usage fee
> for those who drive in" but it is called a "parking fee."
>
> It seems to perfectly capture the semantic we wish to express.

On one hand, I can agree withe the principle behind re-purposing of this
tag. On the other hand, I can see it being quite possible this is going
to throw some routing programs for a loop when "avoid tolls" is selected.

--
Shawn K. Quinn <[hidden email]>
http://www.rantroulette.com
http://www.skqrecordquest.com

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

Re: "toll" related tags appropriate for park entrances?

OSM Volunteer stevea
In reply to this post by Jack Burke-2
On Tue Mar 21 21:17:04 UTC 2017 Shawn K. Quinn wrote:
>On one hand, I can agree withe the principle behind re-purposing of this
>tag. On the other hand, I can see it being quite possible this is going
>to throw some routing programs for a loop when "avoid tolls" is selected.

I never thought of that; excellent catch!  This feels like one of those times where I as human must simply pay attention to "drive with your brain making sense of what's right, rather than letting a GPS/computer/navigation system/driverless car software... make the decision.

(Heh, heh):  in the event of a driverless car "stuck" with these data, it will be more than its routing software that will be looping!

Seriously, this almost feels like a classic case of trying to tag too precisely, then the real world simply intervenes with a "screeching halt" exception.

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

Re: "toll" related tags appropriate for park entrances?

Paul Johnson-3
On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 5:18 PM, OSM Volunteer stevea <[hidden email]> wrote:
On Tue Mar 21 21:17:04 UTC 2017 Shawn K. Quinn wrote:
>On one hand, I can agree withe the principle behind re-purposing of this
>tag. On the other hand, I can see it being quite possible this is going
>to throw some routing programs for a loop when "avoid tolls" is selected.

I never thought of that; excellent catch!  This feels like one of those times where I as human must simply pay attention to "drive with your brain making sense of what's right, rather than letting a GPS/computer/navigation system/driverless car software... make the decision.

Correct.
 
(Heh, heh):  in the event of a driverless car "stuck" with these data, it will be more than its routing software that will be looping!

Seriously, this almost feels like a classic case of trying to tag too precisely, then the real world simply intervenes with a "screeching halt" exception.

Driving's NP-complete anyway.  Don't try to map for something that can't be fully automated. 

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

Re: "toll" related tags appropriate for park entrances?

Kevin Broderick
Functionally, I would argue that payment-required (or pass-required) park entries are effectively the same as a toll, anyhow. I'll give the example of driving to Cooke City, Montana, in the winter—the only way to get there with a wheeled vehicle is via Yellowstone National Park's northwest entrance (and driving through the park). Unless you enter before the entrance booth is manned, they'll be collecting that entrance fee even if you just want to drive through to Cooke.*

*: unless you get there late enough at night or early enough in the morning that they don't have the booth staffed.

On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 3:16 AM, Paul Johnson <[hidden email]> wrote:
On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 5:18 PM, OSM Volunteer stevea <[hidden email]> wrote:
On Tue Mar 21 21:17:04 UTC 2017 Shawn K. Quinn wrote:
>On one hand, I can agree withe the principle behind re-purposing of this
>tag. On the other hand, I can see it being quite possible this is going
>to throw some routing programs for a loop when "avoid tolls" is selected.

I never thought of that; excellent catch!  This feels like one of those times where I as human must simply pay attention to "drive with your brain making sense of what's right, rather than letting a GPS/computer/navigation system/driverless car software... make the decision.

Correct.
 
(Heh, heh):  in the event of a driverless car "stuck" with these data, it will be more than its routing software that will be looping!

Seriously, this almost feels like a classic case of trying to tag too precisely, then the real world simply intervenes with a "screeching halt" exception.

Driving's NP-complete anyway.  Don't try to map for something that can't be fully automated. 

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




--
Kevin Broderick

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

Re: "toll" related tags appropriate for park entrances?

Dale Puch
The tag seems functionally correct, it is paid access.  Fee might apply, but it seems more like it applies to the park itself, not the roads, or you end up creating a very similar but specific use tag just for parks.
As for routing, if the distance around is far enough, and the road size/speed high enough then it can become the better route.  It is a function of giving enough data for the routing software to make the right choice.  The toll cost might be high enough that it would be smart for the routing software to be written to avoid it anyhow.


On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 10:07 AM, Kevin Broderick <[hidden email]> wrote:
Functio



Dale Puch

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

Re: "toll" related tags appropriate for park entrances?

Kevin Kenny-4
On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 5:13 PM, Dale Puch <[hidden email]> wrote:
The tag seems functionally correct, it is paid access.  Fee might apply, but it seems more like it applies to the park itself, not the roads, or you end up creating a very similar but specific use tag just for parks.
 
The state parks here in New York do not generally charge those that arrive on foot for use of the park. The user fee for the park is collected as a vehicle entrance fee. 'Toll' doesn't fit the situation on the ground too badly. You're not paying to use the park, you're paying to drive on the park roads.

Sometimes units such as state campgrounds charge a fee for use of certain facilities (swimming beaches, showers, ...), but I have been surprised at how minimal it can be. Two summers ago, a long hike that I was on took me through a state campground that had signs posted all over that certain facilities were only for the use of campground guests. I asked at the headquarters, and found that instead of paying the $28 that I'd have had to fork over if I'd arrived by car, I could pay $2 for a non-motorized day pass. I happily availed myself of the bathhouse - I surely needed to get cleaned up after a few days hiking through beaver swamp in hot weather!

I wouldn't expect that 'toll' would seriously confuse any router, even after being instructed to 'avoid tolls'. They already have to be able to handle the case, say, of a destination on an island connected to the mainland only by toll bridges. They typically deal with "avoid tolls" by assessing a penalty equivalent to a certain number of minutes of travel time and considering only toll road routings that save at least that much time over toll-free routings to the same destination.

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