Changeset: 51357591
Adding bikeway detail & street detail
Closed by Bill Sellin
Tags
created_by | iD 2.3.2 |
---|---|
host | https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit |
imagery_used | Bing aerial imagery |
locale | en-US |
Discussion
-
Comment from stevea
Hello Bill. Please source the data you use to enter USBR 66 in California. I'm quite familiar with tagging this and I don't think you can tag a route as you have here: it is only an early sketch of a route, proposed, and not signed on the ground. Please explain your intentions. Thanks, SteveA.
-
Comment from Bill Sellin
Hi Steve
You are correct - the USBR 66 has not yet been established by AASHTO, and may never have omn street signage in many jurisdictions, but as the historic 66 was mapped as a bike route, and the Adventure Cycling Association version of route 66 differs, I was trying to clean up the USBR 66 in progress as it gets approval.
My main motivation is to have agencies & cities who use or check the OpenStreetMap for bicycle routes will see this national route crossing their local jurisdictions.
I am one of several Adventure Cycling volunteers working to secure local agency support to CalTrans - to get USBR 66 designated from Needles to Santa Monica.
I am new to OpenStreets and probably should tag all this as proposed but I was trying to reduce the various 66 routes and add those endorsed so far: Santa Monica, West Hollywood, Alhambra, So Pasadena East Pasadena, Arcadia...
I will cease - but may add 'Proposed USBR 66" where the existing 66 is different. -
Comment from stevea
Hi Bill, thanks for your reply.
Please see our wiki page on this: https://wiki.osm.org/wiki/WikiProject_U.S._Bicycle_Route_System
ACA routes are proprietary and copyrighted and not compatible with OSM's ODbL (license). It's a long, long story. I have largely written that wiki, work with ACA (including its "super volunteer" in these endeavors, Kerry Irons, as well as its Board of Directors), got AASHTO to give OSM permission to use its ballot data to map routes, and spoke on the topic at SOTM-US in Washington, DC in 2014.
It may be that various cities have "endorsed" their jurisdiction's segments of the route, but really, only an AASHTO approval is going to allow this route to be entered (without the state=proposed tag).
Again, it's been a six- or seven- year long story, rife with OSM politics, and I appreciate that you are helping to channel the consensus that has emerged by allowing the USBR 66 route in California to emerge as it has and now is. Please don't add "proposed" route to the map, but rather communicate what intentions you might have in the wiki page's Proposed Section, USBR 66 in California row of the table.
Thanks, SteveA
-
Comment from stevea
Or, maybe better, the wiki's Discussion section (tab at top).
Ways (7)
- Huntington Drive (517794758), v1
- Huntington Drive (517794759), v1
- Huntington Drive (517794760), v1
- Fair Oaks Avenue (517794761), v1
- Huntington Drive (390807589), v2
- Huntington Drive (190478452), v4
- Fair Oaks Avenue (59535342), v5
Relations (3)
Nodes (1)
Welcome to OpenStreetMap!
OpenStreetMap is a map of the world, created by people like you and free to use under an open license.
Hosting is supported by Fastly, OSMF corporate members, and other partners.
https://openstreetmap.org/copyright | https://openstreetmap.org |
Copyright OpenStreetMap and contributors, under an open license |