(traducción semiautomática)
Hola a todos. Me dirijo a ustedes porque me gustaría proponer un pequeño cambio en el etiquetaje de las rutas viales en Bolivia. Actualmente existen 45 relaciones viales en Bolivia, todas ellas parte de la “Red Vial Fundamental”. Me gustaría proponer dos cambios:
Cambiar la etiqueta network para que sea inequívoco y coherente con los últimos estándares de etiquetaje. Propongo algo como network=BO:fundamental en lugar de network=Red Vial Fundamental para las rutas que forman parte de la Red Vial Fundamental, y luego BO:departamental y BO:municipal para las relaciones de ruta de nivel inferior, aunque no creo que exista ninguno de estos todavía.
Eliminar el prefijo F de la clave ref. Debido a que las señales para las rutas viales no incluyen la F (ejemplo a continuación), esto no es necesario en la etiqueta ref.
Con el sistema actual, los señales simplificados aparecen como asi:
Estos cambios permitirían que Bolivia y sus señales viales se incluyan en el mapa Americana, que busca eventualmente proporcionar una cobertura global de las señales viales. Actualizaría las páginas de la Wiki OSM para reflejar estos cambios y agregaría páginas para las nuevas etiquetas de network para que los usuarios podrían entender lo que significan. ¡Avísenme si tienen alguna duda, idea o pregunta sobre mi propuesta o si creen que debería publicarla en otro lugar!
Hi everyone. I’m reaching out because I’d like to propose a small change to the tagging of road routes in Bolivia. There are currently 45 road relations in Bolivia, all of them a part of the “Red Vial Fundamental”. I would like to propose two changes:
Change the network tag to be unambiguous and consistent with the latest tagging standards. I propose something like network=BO:fundamental instead of network=Red Vial Fundamental for routes that are part of the Red Fundamental, and then BO:departamental and BO:municipal for the lower-level route relations, although I don’t think there are any of these yet.
Remove the F prefix from the ref key. Because signs for highway routes does not include the F as far as I can tell (example below), this isn’t needed in the ref tag.
Under the current tagging scheme, the shields appear like this:
These changes would allow Bolivia and its highway signs to be included in the Americana map, which seeks to eventually provide global coverage of highway shields. I would be happy to update any OSM Wiki pages to reflect these changes and add pages for the new network tags so that users can understand what they mean. Let me know if you have any thoughts or questions about my proposal or if you think I should post this elsewhere!
Hi, I don’t understand what the problem is with the letter F on the ref tag. Just like in Argentina, on the road signs you don’t see “RN#”.
The road signs in Bolivia are very old, they were added around 2000 and some recently. Lack of money to change is a problem in Bolivia, and you also see it on the street name signs in the cities.
The people of the road administration had and still have the habit of copying everything that comes from the United States without adjusting it to the local reality, and so if you ask them why they didn’t put the letter F, they don’t know how to answer.
In the last 10 years, the use of the letter F increases, the same government staff, newspapers, state contracting publications mention the letter F more. In several departments (regions), regional roads are starting to use it in their official documents. The municipal authorities are relatively new (around 1990) and have so many problems to deal with such as water service, sewage, waste, illegal constructions, and naming the roads is not seen as important.
Reviewing official documents in several Bolivian departments already mention the use of the letter D in their roads, in two regions (tarija and cochabamba) we already have the letter D on the ref tag.
I also think the network tag is wrong and this is my proposal:
National: BO:national for the Fundamental Road Network.
Departmental: BO:regional
Municipal: BO:municipal
To identify one regional road network from another, add the ISO 3166-2 code of the region: BO:C:regional (cochabamba), BO:T:regional (tarija).
Thanks for the response. My main reason for seeking to remove the F- prefix is that that practice is explicitly discouraged in the documentation for ref (here in English and here in Spanish)
On route=road relations, the ref is a bare “route number”,[3] relying on network=* to convey information about the road network
By including the F- prefix in the ref tag, the information that the relation belongs to the Red Vial Fundamental is in two places, the network tag and the ref tag. We could move the ref=F## into the loc_ref key, so that it remains accessible.
Also, in case there was any confusion, I am not proposing touching the highway ways themselves, which also have ref=F##, just the relation.
On the tagging scheme for the networks, I’m open to anything, including having the department code in the tag (B, H, C, L, O, N, P, S, and T). It may make most sense to put these codes at the end (for example network=BO:departamental:C). There are no road relations at this level yet but the groundwork for some of them has already been done as you point out. I had proposed fundamental, departamental, and municipal to adhere most closely to the existing terminology for the road network. If there’s a consensus to depart from that, that is fine with me.
Is the “F” ever separated from the rest of the number in writing, as it is on signage? Many countries use alphabetic prefixes only in the abbreviation but not in the full spelled-out form. On the other hand, some countries like the UK always include the letter with the number in the full name, as in “the A201 road”, because the “A” doesn’t stand for anything.
Generally speaking, the ref=* and network=* tags on relations are structured data: the ref=* only contains the bare number so that a data consumer can reconstruct the abbreviated, spelled-out, or signposted form as necessary, without having to extract parts of tags. But the ref=* tag on individual ways can continue to show the abbreviated form, including any prefix normally used in writing.
I agree with your proposal about removing the F prefix from the ref key and moving it to the loc_ref key.
About the network tag, in my proposal (BO:national, BO:regional, BO:municipal) I was thinking of a generic format, but your proposal is more in line with the legislation.
I think we should change the name of the roads. Officially, use this format: “Ruta Fundamental #” (Fundamental Route #).
Officially, the word F is attached to the number, following the format: F#. For example: F10, F7 or F4. This ID should be on the signs, but for some reason they only put the number.
Route names follow the format: “Ruta Fundamental #” (Fundamental Route #). For example: “Ruta Fundamental 4” and the ID is “F4”.
