Логотип OpenStreetMap OpenStreetMap

How not to use OS Locator

Опубліковано учасником chriscf 20 Липня 2011, мова: English

Before:

not:name = $name
note = This is in OSSV and OSL, but I can't find any hint that it's ever existed on the ground

After:

highway = residential
name = $name
not:name = $name
note = This is in OSSV and OSL, but I can't find any hint that it's ever existed on the ground

Піктограма електронної пошти Піктограма Bluesky Піктограма Facebook Піктограма LinkedIn Піктограма Mastodon Піктограма Telegram Піктограма X

Обговорення

Коментар від stevage, 20 Липня 2011 в 03:37

"it" meaning, the name, or the street? If the street never existed, how would you tag that? not:highway=residential?

Коментар від chriscf, 20 Липня 2011 в 04:18

"It" in this case referring to the physical roadway. There's a gap in the pavement where the junction would have been, so I presume it's not a copyright trap, but beyond is simply trees and bushes. Aerials in the location are missing the tell-tale gaps in the vegetation that would reveal a street or a driveway.

Коментар від TomH, 20 Липня 2011 в 07:47

Sounds like it was maybe a road that was planned (and the plan provided to OS by the council) but never actually built beyond the lowered curb.

Коментар від Vincent de Phily, 20 Липня 2011 в 10:14

In that case... Don't map it ? Unless you know for sure (official documents) that it's an area under construction (with a proper ETA), then you could map it as such, so that it can be easily tagged as highway=residential (or whatever) once it's constructed. Otherwise this is like the various forms of "disused" tags : not useful and more likely to cause problems than anything else.

Коментар від sdoerr, 20 Липня 2011 в 10:25

It's a bit of a fiddle, but a convention has arisen of coding highway=no in cases such as this.

Коментар від sdoerr, 20 Липня 2011 в 10:25

It's a bit of a fiddle, but a convention has arisen of coding highway=no in cases such as this.

Коментар від chillly, 20 Липня 2011 в 17:06

I think chriscf's point is that someone (an armchair mapper) has added the road details based on OS data without surveying it and has ignored the deliberate comments that show it doesn't exist. I agree that that is how not to use OS data. The chase to 100% completeness of agreement with OS Locator data might tempt some to cut corners.

Коментар від Wynndale, 21 Липня 2011 в 11:31

You might as well let the Vale of Glamorgan journey planner know.

http://www.travelfor.co.uk/Vale_of_Glamorgan/Graig_Trewyddfa/Plas_Y_Coed_Road/

Увійти, аби залишити коментар