OpenStreetMap

[Alps]

Split off at-grade discussion.

[NE2]

Good call - I was going to request the same.

[Scott5114]

OpenStreetMap now appears to default to the Mapquest-rendered tiles. I like the looks of them better, but are they copyright encumbered?

[NE2]

OpenStreetMap now appears to default to the Mapquest-rendered tiles.

Are you sure you don't have a cookie set? Try changing back to standard, closing the browser, and reopening.

I like the looks of them better, but are they copyright encumbered?

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mapquest#MapQuest-hosted_map_tiles
Looks like terms are the same, though this is mainly directed at apps using the tiles.

[Scott5114]

OpenStreetMap now appears to default to the Mapquest-rendered tiles.

Are you sure you don't have a cookie set? Try changing back to standard, closing the browser, and reopening.

I may well have a cookie set...I noticed it first when someone linked to an OSM map. The URL could have forced it to display in the MQ tileset, and set a cookie... like I said though, I don't care much for the "regular" tiles so I'll just stick with the MQ ones.

[vtk]

The drawback to the MQ tiles is they don't update as fast.  At the moment they seem to be a couple of weeks behind, but then again, rendering and possibly updating of their database is probably suspended pending completion of the license change / redaction bot.

[Central Avenue]

The only thing I particularly like about MQ's tiles is that they use proper shields, instead of those annoying bubbles that just say "US 23" or "I 270" that the Mapnik tiles use.

[Alps]

The only thing I particularly like about MQ's tiles is that they use proper shields, instead of those annoying bubbles that just say "US 23" or "I 270" that the Mapnik tiles use.

Do the MQ tiles work with multiplexes? I checked US 202/206, and while OSM mapping shows no route number at all, Mapquest just shows 202 and not 206. I'd almost prefer no number to only showing one, which could be misleading.

[NE2]

The only thing I particularly like about MQ's tiles is that they use proper shields, instead of those annoying bubbles that just say "US 23" or "I 270" that the Mapnik tiles use.

Do the MQ tiles work with multiplexes? I checked US 202/206, and while OSM mapping shows no route number at all, Mapquest just shows 202 and not 206. I'd almost prefer no number to only showing one, which could be misleading.

Neither shows overlaps properly (unless the ref tag is 8 characters or less; "US 202;US 206" is way too long). Someone has made a rendering with overlaps and 'real' shield designs; most 'bannered' routes are not displayed due to his disagreement with the most common way of tagging them: http://elrond.aperiodic.net/shields/?zoom=12&lat=40.67&lon=-74.53&layers=B
If the shield is not rendered, that means there is no relation for the route, only tags on the way.

[vdeane]

I would say that they don't show overlaps properly even if the ref tag is 8 characters or less.  Have you seen I-86/17 in NY?  17 is a NY route, and multiplexes aren't signed like that anywhere.

[vtk]

most 'bannered' routes are not displayed due to his disagreement with the most common way of tagging them:

Which is silly.  And so is arguing about the proper way to tag bannered routes, at least in the context of making a renderer work.  The solution I suggested is to normalize the tagging as a preprocessing step; this way, multiple tagging styles can be accommodated while keeping the already-complex map rendering stylesheet from becoming yet a magnitude more complex.  I suppose the guy could still do that in the future.

[NE2]

I would say that they don't show overlaps properly even if the ref tag is 8 characters or less.  Have you seen I-86/17 in NY?  17 is a NY route, and multiplexes aren't signed like that anywhere.

Overlaps aren't normally signed as anything but the shields next to each other. Dashes and slashes are out because some states use them in route numbers (Louisiana and West Virginia). Commas might be OK, but a semicolon is no worse and is probably a more obvious separator. (In any case, this is after-the-fact justification of a choice made in the early days of OSM.)

As for MapQuest's rendering, it also chokes on four-digit and lettered routes, and omits the part after the slash in a WV county route. There are issues near the international borders (apparently Canada and Mexico don't deserve a better rendering); for example the U.S. style invades Tijuana and part of Detroit is non-U.S. style.

[Roadsguy]

I just saw several roads in Phillipsburg, NJ labeled with "(Shunpike)." And the old US 22 bridge is shown as "free bridge." Is this supposed to be this way or did someone just stick it there?

[NE2]

I just saw several roads in Phillipsburg, NJ labeled with "(Shunpike)." And the old US 22 bridge is shown as "free bridge." Is this supposed to be this way or did someone just stick it there?

Free Bridge may be the local name. Adding (Shunpike) to the street names is BS though; removing it.

[Alps]

I just saw several roads in Phillipsburg, NJ labeled with "(Shunpike)." And the old US 22 bridge is shown as "free bridge." Is this supposed to be this way or did someone just stick it there?

Free Bridge may be the local name. Adding (Shunpike) to the street names is BS though; removing it.

That's hilarious. All shunpike routes should be so labeled in OSM.

[Roadsguy]

Just realized that Camden, NJ overrides Philadelphia as you zoom out, even though Philadelphia is undoubtedly dominant.

...Even with its own installment of a classic Breezewood.

[NE2]

Looks like MapQuest has started experimenting with rendering (two-route) overlaps at low zooms: http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=33.19&lon=-82.039&zoom=9&layers=Q

I see several issues - the second route is sometimes incorrectly in a circle, and "SR X" is sometimes (always?) in a county rectangle.

[Roadsguy]

What exactly is TIGER? I see it referenced in some Advanced tags that seem to have no effect on the Simple editing mode.

[NE2]

What exactly is TIGER?

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/TIGER

[Roadsguy]

It seems JOSM won't continue either one of the ways that both end at a node. It'll make a new one. It took me forever to figure this out. Is this an intentional feature, or a bug? Either way, it's really annoying.

[NE2]

It seems JOSM won't continue either one of the ways that both end at a node. It'll make a new one. It took me forever to figure this out. Is this an intentional feature, or a bug? Either way, it's really annoying.

Select both the node and the way you want to continue.

[Roadsguy]

Tried. Worked!

[NE2]

Strange rendering bug: http://www.openstreetmap.org/?way=135724062
It's as if the nodes are missing from the rendering database. (No, it's not "redaction"-related.)

[Roadsguy]

Say, should PA 51 from the current northern end of PA Tpk. 43 down to its interchange with US 119 still be a trunk road? Maybe not now that there's a complete expressway route along that piece, and eventually (might?) be all the way up to I-279 where it turns into a short expressway and multiplexes US 19.

[vdeane]

Strange rendering bug: http://www.openstreetmap.org/?way=135724062
It's as if the nodes are missing from the rendering database. (No, it's not "redaction"-related.)

Strange?  Maybe if you use OSM for everything, but Google has that kind of stuff everywhere.