From OpenStreetMap Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

distance=* instead of pk=*

pk=* is French and not intuitive. I propose to use distance=* instead. See also: --Skyper 19:31, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

pk=* was older description in france (every 1km), it's now PR distance=* since years

Kilometre as default unit

We should use the metric system as default. For milestones kilometre seems the right choice. --Skyper 19:31, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

- I think we should use whatever number is printed on the milestone and record it verbatim. If the units of that number is not the default (km), then we should add an explicit unit designation. T99 (talk) 20:53, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

How to specify two distances?

Most of milestones in Russia looks like two-sided metal flag. Each side of these flags have own distance, for two directions. For example milestones placed on Russian road M-5 “Ural” contains distances to Chelyabinsk and to Moscow.

Which of distance should I put to distance=* tag? Which tag should I use for distance of opposite direction?

I also wondered this. I think a schema like distance:zero-point=* would work. F.e. distance:London=15.8 for the distance to London (with localised names, as they appear in the place node name=* tag).
I ran into such milestones on a cycleway (it used to be a railway connecting Roeselare and Ieper, so it's very straight and long). Every crossing had a milestone, with the distance to Roeselare on one side, and the distance to Ieper on the other. --Sanderd17 (talk) 16:27, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

There is some idea on - use "milestone:forward" or "milestone:backward" attributes. But what direction is "forward" or "backward"?--Zlyh (talk) 08:36, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

There is some old discussion about milestone:

Talk:Proposed features/Milestones

Lithuania has similar signs (probably descending from the same Soviet-era design). The ones I have seen have two “faces” at a 90° angle, each tilted 45° from the road. Each side shows the distance from one end of the road, so the driver will always see ascending numbers.
However, there does seem to be a “primary” direction for each road: Roads are generally referred to by their route, such as “Vilnius–Prienai–Marijampolė“ (always in that order), which is usually also the content of the name=* tag. The national road directorate uses the distance from the first place (Vilnus in that case) for kilometric point references. In situations like these, I would see a point for tagging distances in the same manner (i.e. from Vilnius rather than Marijampolė in the example quoted). --Stanton (talk) 21:25, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

Node on the way or in the mark position?

What position should be the node with the information highway=milestone? --LucFreitas (talk) 15:25, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

Real position. ViriatoLusitano Flag of Portugal Portugal (Talk | Contribs) 00:05, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
I would say on the highway. Otherwise we won't be able tell which highway it belongs to when we have 2 or more nearby highways. By using it as a separate node it will suffer the same problems from Key:traffic_sign#As_a_separate_node --naoliv (talk) 21:14, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
Isn't this corrected by having a ref tag on the milestone with the highway ref it belongs to? ViriatoLusitano Flag of Portugal Portugal (Talk | Contribs) 21:23, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
And if the highway doesn't have a ref? :-) But "ref" in milestones has another meaning: "is optional, only to be used if the milestone actually has a reference number written on it." --naoliv (talk) 21:27, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
Real position +1. And about the relation between milestone and highway...Why not using a new relation type? BTW, this page is changed to "The node should be part of the way that represents the highway." --Yellowsoar (talk) 09:52, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
On the highway, because the sign has a property of a road. It is useless otherwise. The same as for traffic_sign=city_limit and highway=give_way. --Zverik (talk) 18:32, 29 March 2018 (UTC)
Milestones mark a position on a road, as a distance from a reference point. Distance is usually measured along the center line of the road, which coincides with the way for a single-carriageway road. I would assume the majority of use cases to be about translating locations such as “km 36 on road A43” (frequently used by road administrations) into a coordinate pair, whereas few would care about where the physical milestone is located. Taken together, that would mean placing the node on the way for a single-carriageway road, and between the carriageways for a road with two separate carriageways. --Stanton (talk) 13:57, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

Use of ref=*

The wiki page currently states:

ref=* is optional, only to be used if the milestone actually has a reference number written on it.

Recently, I had a discussion with someone who maintained that this tag should be the reference number of the milestone, not of the road.

I currently have the following use case: I get location indications such as “km 36 on road A43” (a notation frequently used by road administrations) and need to translate them into a coordinate pair. (I can handle cases in which results are a few meters off the road, and am also prepared to deal with ambiguous kilometric points.) For this I need to match milestones to their roads, which is very easy to do when there is a tag indicating the road reference number—whether that is ref=* or something else, as long as it is uniform. Without such a tag, matching becomes quite complex. It is still doable if the milestone tags are on the way, but for roads with separate carriageways common practice seems to be to place milestone nodes in the middle, between the two ways.

Also, I am not sure how frequent reference numbers for milestones are (apart from the reference number of the road being indicated on the milestone)—in which case the ref=* tag would hold something other than the road reference number. In the case of Poland, however, mileages are usually indicated on delineators with no road reference number, yet over 90% of the 35,000+ milestones in Poland have the ref=* tag set (87 milestones do not; of those that have, 97 are my own edits).

If we are talking about the road reference number, I wonder if it is that important to know that milestone 1 has the road’s reference number written on it while milestone 2 doesn’t.

I would therefore gravitate towards one of the following two alternatives:

  • Use ref=* to indicate the road to which the distance refers, regardless of whether or not is is indicated on the milestone itself. This seems to be widely used already, even if it slightly deviates from the definition of ref=*.
  • Introduce a new tag, say road_ref=*, to indicate the road to which the distance refers, regardless of whether or not is is indicated on the milestone itself. This does not clash with any usage I am aware of, but is not currently being used anywhere. (According to taginfo, road_ref=* is currently used 1,295 times, 99% of those cases are for TMC data.)

Opinions? --Stanton (talk) 15:22, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

Yardage markers


I'm using this tag for distance markers on golf courses unless a more suitable tag can be identified. For example: highway=milestone + distance=150 yd (pictured). T99 (talk) 21:21, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

How about golf:course=yardage_marker or golf:course=distance_marker? Using anything highway=* looks plain wrong to me, as it implies a road-related feature, which is clearly not the case here. Introducing a new tag is a lot less headache-prone. --Stanton (talk) 19:44, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Miles? Stones? Time for aliasing a new name

The average editor would think of adding a material=metal tag.

So I think this should be called distance marker etc. Anyway, please divorce

  • Stones
  • Miles

from its name, to make it more modern/neutral.

Or maybe make it a valid alias for a more modern name. Jidanni (talk) 06:24, 2 October 2019 (UTC) --Zverik (talk) 06:43, 2 October 2019 (UTC) Jidanni (talk) 08:26, 2 October 2019 (UTC)
The obvious conclusion would then be highway=location_marker. --Stanton (talk) 19:46, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguations for duplicate distances?

Kilometrierung alt-neu, B178.jpg

Numbering of kilometric points is not always continuous. Such anomalies can happen where roads are rerouted, or stretches of a new road are built before the entire route has been planned in detail. This can result in duplicate kilometric points, e.g. when the new stretch of road is longer than the one it replaces.

The image shows one such example from the B 178 in Austria, a section of which was rerouted. The rerouted section ends at km 5.326, which corresponds to the existing 4.6 km point. The duplicate points are prepended with a letter, so the sequene now becomes: … – 4,6 – 4,8 – 5,0 – 5,2 – 5,326 / D 4,6 – D 4,8 – D 5,0 – D 5,2 – 5,4 - …

In Poland, when a national road is upgraded to an expressway, it usually inherits the old kilometric points. However, the first sections built are typically bypass roads around towns where the old national road cut through the middle of the town. Kilometric points on these sections tend to be numbered from 0 on. When referring to these kilometric points, an extra letter is appended to the road number. For example, when referring to a kilometric point on the S8 between Zambrów and Jeżewo, this is usually given as “S8n, km 12”.

Is there a standard tagging scheme for these kind of disambiguation identifiers? --Stanton (talk) 18:27, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

For Poland, I have now started tagging these sections with ref=S8;S8n, after seeing that some markers already use the extra letter in the road ref. Therefore, the road ref with the extra letter seems correct to me (especially as some delineators report it, while others do not). I would also leave the road ref without the extra letter, as that is the reference for the road as a whole, and it is easier to parse two refs than to guess a missing one. --Stanton (talk) 19:36, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Rendering important for emergency reporting and rescue

See for the importance of rendering milestones. Jidanni (talk) 15:31, 9 September 2020 (UTC)