| Changeset | No. | Date | Contributor | Comment |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 55822890 by clay_c | 1 | 2018-03-08 18:58:55 UTC | maxerickson | https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/217742231 was not correctly connected to crossing streets after this update. You may want to review these changes for other connectivity problems.max |
| 56539662 by clay_c | 1 | 2018-02-21 18:20:21 UTC | Paul Johnson | I still have some concerns about this mass attempt at priority creep on the highway=* tag. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_States_roads_tagging#Secondary_taghttps://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_States_roads_tagging#Tertiary_highways |
| 2 | 2018-02-21 20:37:18 UTC | MikeN | I agree about concerns with mass priority creep. DOT / Government classifications do not directly translate to an OSM classification. Routers will still select a road when it best matches the travel itinerary and mode. | |
| 3 | 2018-02-21 22:56:10 UTC | clay_c | Alright, I'll put a pause to this change for a bit. I want to continue this discussion later, though right now I think I just need to take a break. Thanks for being patient. | |
| 4 | 2018-02-22 01:50:06 UTC | Paul Johnson | No problem, thanks for being open on this. Last time there was someone who went a little too strict with the tagging, we ended up with the entire US highway system tagged trunk nationwide | |
| 5 | 2018-02-26 22:47:53 UTC | clay_c | Alright, I'm back and my head's clear. Thanks for giving me some time.I want to make sure we're on the same page with a few things. I'm avoiding being strict on tagging, and there's a few FM/RM roads I've tagged higher than secondary as well as state/US highways lower than primary. It's still co... | |
| 6 | 2018-02-27 01:51:13 UTC | Paul Johnson | RIght, generally a good idea to weight the local functionality with the classification to kind of rank it out. Like a major thoroughfare through a city (like, say, FM 2786 or CR 150 in Allen) might be underrated even as a secondary. But, say, FM 1885 or FM 920, northwest of Weatherford? Yeah, tha... | |
| 7 | 2018-02-27 01:56:28 UTC | Paul Johnson | Also, yeah, I'd fully agree that Texas makes for especially odd classification owing to it's huge number of auxiliary routes, of various and often nebulous significance, such as, despite signage, there is only one Ranch Road (RM 1), and *all* of the rest are properly FMs, and while the FMs are gener... | |
| 56508945 by clay_c | 1 | 2018-02-20 04:23:57 UTC | Paul Johnson | Generally FM/RM roads would be tertiary. Maybe higher if it's a big multilane boulevard in a city or something like that. --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/56508945 |
| 2 | 2018-02-20 20:31:29 UTC | clay_c | Texas has rather high standards for maintaining FM/RM roads. Many of them connect up with regular state roads in OK and NM that are already tagged as secondary. I believe FM/RM roads should be secondary whenever they form a connective network of well-maintained roads in between state/US highways, wh... | |
| 3 | 2018-02-21 01:03:17 UTC | Paul Johnson | My concern would be parity with surrounding states. Typically speaking, state highways default to highway=secondary unless there's additional capacity, and highway=primary would be a US highway, and a highway=tertiary being pretty much anything with a centerline at lower levels or state auxiliary l... | |
| 4 | 2018-02-21 02:22:16 UTC | clay_c | State highways and US highways in Texas are often built to the same standards and are otherwise indistinguishable. Sometimes they may be widened, but that can happen anywhere regardless of whether it's a state highway or a US highway. I don't see a convincing case for why similarly-built highways in... | |
| 5 | 2018-02-21 02:40:36 UTC | Paul Johnson | > State highways and US highways in Texas are often built to the same standards and are otherwise indistinguishable.That's fairly typically the case everywhere.> I don't see a convincing case for why similarly-built highways in Texas should have different designations just based on the... | |
| 56504627 by clay_c | 1 | 2018-02-20 04:23:05 UTC | Paul Johnson | Looks like a lot of pretty clearcut secondaries got upgraded to primary here. Generally speaking, a two lane rural state highway would be a secondary (primary primary if it's a four lane undivided or a major street in a city), and auxiliary state highways would be a secondary or tertiary. ... |
| 2 | 2018-02-20 20:19:37 UTC | clay_c | Most of the "two lane rural state highways" in Texas have already been tagged as primary roads. It makes sense for them to be tagged as such, because they form a connective network of uniform, well-maintained, high-speed roads across the state. If you'd like to add lane numbers and speed l... | |
| 48319256 by clay_c | 1 | 2017-09-28 23:08:50 UTC | compdude | I noticed you removed the primary_link way that represents the left turn lane from 205th St/ Lake Ballinger Way to 205th St. (the secondary road) This is physically separated by a barrier from the thru lanes that continue southeast to Ballinger Way. The reason for the existence of a separate way i... |
| 52321542 by clay_c | 1 | 2017-09-25 19:01:42 UTC | Harald Hartmann | Hello claysmalley. At your blog you haven't mentioned, that you will introduce the new and so far unkown and undocumented key `frontage_road`. Is this key really necessary? #newkey |
| 2 | 2017-09-26 17:28:43 UTC | clay_c | Ah, I should mention that. I chose to add it because most of these frontage roads are already marked as `note=frontage`. I didn't like that it was taking over the `note` tag, but I didn't want to delete useful information, so I moved the information to a new tag. I'm okay with having a critical disc... | |
| 47923957 by clay_c | 1 | 2017-04-19 05:03:04 UTC | DavidKewley | In Laguna Niguel, CA (near me), you deleted all tags http://osm.mapki.com/history/way.php?id=321217297 from the Lifetime Fitness parking area http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/321217297 except amenity=parking. The tags you deleted looked probably accurate and helpful to me. Why did you delete them?... |
| 2 | 2017-04-19 08:20:31 UTC | clay_c | Oof, there are some tags that shouldn't have been deleted. I'll fix that.As for the Lifetime Fitness issues, someone had gone through and added in all the Lifetime Fitness locations across the country... poorly. There was a lot of messy data: parking lots drawn as one giant zig-zagging parking a... | |
| 3 | 2017-04-19 14:55:39 UTC | DavidKewley | Thanks very much! Makes more sense to me now. | |
| 44797142 by clay_c | 1 | 2017-03-31 10:45:23 UTC | skquinn | Not everything that goes in a circle is a roundabout: way 462670713 is not a roundabout and should not have been tagged as such as it is simply a circle drive in the middle of a residential roadway. Contrast with way 462670700, which is correctly tagged as a roundabout as it is an intersection of mu... |
| 43719875 by clay_c | 1 | 2016-11-20 13:15:07 UTC | mueschel | Hi,you put the tag "true=A" on 30 ways - could you check that?Cheers, Jan |
| 2 | 2016-11-21 22:18:17 UTC | clay_c | wat. dunno how that happened; i'll fix it | |
| 3 | 2016-11-21 22:21:54 UTC | clay_c | are you sure it's 30 ways? i could only find 6 with that tag | |
| 4 | 2016-11-21 22:32:52 UTC | mueschel | Seems the other 24 are in Russia from another user... Strange that they appeared on the same day. Thanks for fixing! | |