But what’s the need for having the government classification tagged? Is there any data consumer who uses it, who wouldn’t just utilise the DataSA dataset itself? It seems redundant, confusing, and unnecessary, based on the current commentary.
I agree it probably does count as a import, I will change the date
is this even serious or just finding any random objection you can to throw at this proposal?
1 Like
I’m just trying to get an idea for the purpose of this import, considering the lack of wiki page documenting the import as per Import/Guidelines - OpenStreetMap Wiki.
I hadn’t yet formed an opinion as to whether I support or oppose this, but I’m not really favouring an import with no real documentation and some level of opposition/hostility to the community asking questions.
1 Like
It seems like a straightforward question to me - and one that I’d expect that you’d be able to answer in a more reasonable way rather than:
OpenStreetMap is a community. If you think that the way that we do something is wrong or needs to be changed in some way you need to be able to discuss it in an adult way and persuade people to your point of view. You haven’t been successful with either of those. Despite this, people have have been more open to your ideas than many OSM communities worldwide would have been.
There is actually plenty of precedent for storing “legal status” separately from an OSM highway value (the 3 jurisdictions of the UK are one example, but there are others elsewhere). However, I wouldn’t expect that you’d translate Data SA’s road values into OSM’s before doing so, and if the data from Data SA is easily available and can legally be combined with OSM it can certainly be argued that there’s no benefit from having that data here too.
2 Likes
i dont know man, for someone that emails the DWG telling them how bad i am and youre afraid to communicate with me, just seems weird is all
Could you please remain on the topic at hand and avoid ad hominem attacks. If you’d like to get approval from this edit, I’d highly recommend focusing on questions regarding the edit instead of attacking those trying to discuss it.
5 Likes
im just waiting for another ban at this point
Hi Slice01,
Thank you for posting this. Having a look at the current South Australian more important road segments in OSM, you can see we have over 20,000 road segments not including link roads. At 20,000, this appears to fit in as a bulk import.
| Row Labels | Count of highway | Count of designation | |
|---|---|---|---|
| primary | 3857 | ||
| secondary | 10423 | 9 | |
| trunk | 6094 | ||
| Grand Total | 20374 | 9 | |
Can I ask the following questions please?
- Where is the incoming data coming from and do we have permission to use it or is this duplicating the existing highway element?
- For what reason do we require this in OSM? I cannot see a glaringly obvious use case ?
- How will this be maintained? Clearly roads move statii overtime and overtime this attribute will degrade.
- Currently no other state or territory has significant or reliable usage of designation other than shared areas - what makes SA different? (See below)
- What happens to the 9 entries that currently have “58” in the designation field.
Having a bit more understanding will allow us to understand what is being proposed thanks.
Designation summary for highways in Australia
|— | — | — | —|
| Highway Type | Count of highway | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| bridleway | 2 | ||
| bus_stop | 15 | ||
| cycleway | 411 | ||
| footway | 204 | ||
| living_street | 11 | ||
| path | 50 | ||
| pedestrian | 1 | ||
| primary | 22 | ||
| residential | 84 | ||
| secondary | 28 | ||
| service | 156 | ||
| tertiary | 34 | ||
| track | 100 | ||
| unclassified | 41 | ||
| Grand Total | 1159 |
4 Likes
Disclaimer: I am not part of the Australian Community.
If you want to get community consensus in this topic, you realy need to:
- Document your plans in more detail.
- Be more polite to people asking questions.
For me it is at the moment unclear if you are proposing a mass edit or an import. Do you want to import an externam data source into OSM? Do you want to change existing objects by searching for one tag and add another tag?
What exact queries do you mean? Please post the source code or a link so that we can have a look on which objects will be edited.
I do not understand this sentance. Why will manual work be necessary after your mass edit/import?
3 Likes
hey thankyou for writing a actual educated thoughtful response with a edit summary and clear numbered questions, even though this has probably been derailed by the usual trolls I will still answer you.
1, the data is sourced from Data SA and yes the project has full permission to use the data. However 99% of the Data is already in OSM as the Highway classification. For this mass edit the data will be source directly from OSM which is why I do not believe this is strictly a “import”
2, at this point it is a means of preserving the legal classifications that are already in the map, my diary entry is 1 example slice0’s Diary | the DWG rules placed on my edits have already ruined the map | OpenStreetMap somebody’s interpretation of a highway classification has the right of authority over the legal classification. thus over time the cureent legal classifications will be lost on the map. Designation is supposedly the correct tag for this purpose.
-
as the data is easily available anyone of the millions of contributors can check and verify as their desire.
-
what makes SA different is that somebody (me) actually put in the data manually based on a mechanical edit proposal from 2015.
-
ive looked at those sections they seem like errors to begin with so they will be replaced
what makes you think I have any intention to returning to editing after the way I get treated by the community and the DWG, banned for no reason as well lol
Hello Folks,
Moderator here. Unfortunaletly I have had to close this topic.
I had PM’ed @slice0 to inform them that they had crossed the line with some of their personal attacks and suggested that they refrain from doing that. I also explained that if they continued I would have to close the topic.
I have recieved a reply indicating that they were not interested in my views and as a result this topic is closed.
7 Likes
The Edit
this mass edit proposal is intended to add the Key:designation - OpenStreetMap Wiki tag to all current Primary, Secondary and Trunk Roads. example, all Secondary Roads will additionally carry the “designation”-“Secondary” tag.
Method
I plan to do this with JOSM with 3 edits 1 for Primary Roads 1 for Secondary Roads and 1 for Trunk roads. If there are any hardware limits like memory or the data is to large it will have to be broken down into more edits. It will be done by “way” queries in overpass turbo.
Errors
while I was banned from editing there were some changes made to some roads which no longer are tagged as the legal classification.
If and After the mass edit is done the above roads will have to be manually changed accordingly.
When
I plan on doing this in two weeks from now which will be 17th of March 24’. This will only go ahead if approved by our Australian DWG member.
any questions feel free to ask
Just to bring to your attention that the designation tag is for recording legal status. So that means that if the roads dataset from DataSA has all roads in SA classified with different terms than what OSM uses then it is the SA classifications term that should go into the tag value.
For example designation=collector or designation=local.
But are these actually Legal statuses or just a classification that the state has assigned? By which I mean, can you please point me to the piece of legislation that applies in SA where “collector” and “local” roads are established/defined? What is the legal difference between the two? It could be that legally different default speed limits or usage restrictions apply.
A good example of where the designation tag is used is in United Kingdom. They have legislation that defines which users can legally use different types of designated public rights of way. They then use these legal terms in the designation tag (e.g. designation=public_bridleway).
If not a legal value, then some other tag is better used. For example: offical_classification=collector.
Since this is a repost of a previously closed discussion, I’ve included some of the questions asked about this mass edit/import that weren’t previously answered. As replies to the previous discussion included assumptions of trolling, I’m going to state that these questions are being asked in good faith, in an attempt to further understand the mass edit/import and the decisions made as part of it.
-
If the idea is to have highways tagged with the state government’s classifications, wouldn’t it be best to actually use their classifications (freeway, arterial, collector, local, etc.) for this?
-
Currently, designation= is used in Australia to highlight shared paths and shared zones, among other undocumented uses, would this edit conflict with that potential existing use, and if so, how would that be handled to prevent data loss or conflicting tag usage within one country? Is there another tag that could be used for this instead, considering that a proposal to use designated= for this purpose globally was rejected in the past?
-
Since this is an automated edit, there should be a wiki page for this as per the Automated Edits code of conduct. It also could be considered an import as well, which means the Import Guidelines would potentially need to be followed.
Looks like @RobJN has asked about points 1 and 2 to some extend with his reply, but I’ve kept them in there since there’s some relevant links as well as comments about the designation= tag.
3 Likes
Also I think it would help to document this using the import bplan outline page as a guide to the sort of details to document. My questions above cover the “tagging plan”: section of that wiki page.
1 Like
Following @TheSwavu closing this thread, @slice0 created a new thread, duplicating this topic.
I have merged the new thread here, for what I hope are obvious reasons.
@slice0 , if you would like to reopen the discussion, you will need to address the concerns that have been raised to you. Please refrain from relitigating the discussion by creating new threads.