Proposal:Toll/mailing list

Discussions from the mailing list: https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2019-May/thread.html

1

May 8 14:50:34 UTC 2019, Mateusz Konieczny:

> I would like to hear your thoughts and comments here: > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/toll <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/toll>>  

I see no good reason to turn simple boolean tag (toll=yes/ toll=no are 98,98% of all values[1]) into something highly complicated. It would work better as a new tag

Also, what is the point of tagging that road located in Italy is an Italian toll road?

[1] https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/toll#values <https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/toll#values>

I don't see it as complicated. It's not like maxspeed where you enter a number, but it's not nearly as complicated as other already accepted forms of tagging. Moreover the documentation is already very detailed, provides a lot of examples and guides you through step by step. So if you have a hard time using the tag, you can use copy & paste.

Why we need something more detailed than yes/no is also very easy to explain. Just imagine maxspeed as boolean. You can say if there is a maximum speed on that road or not, but how fast are you allowed to drive? Same here. There are so many different types of toll systems that a boolean just doesn't cut it here. The greater idea behind this to provide more detailed data for better routing options (eg. you want to use the motorway which you already paied for, but don't want to use roads with extra toll)

On new tags. If you use toll=yes and toll:SUBKEY=TAG to describe the road you can go with toll=TAG as well. But if you have an idea that you think is better than this example, don't hesitate to hare it.

Italian roads: Simply because there is no worldwide toll system. There is not even an EU-wide system. So if you want to use toll roads in Ggermany, but not in Poland you need a way to tag the roads or you can not select them.

--TBKMrt (talk) 12:19, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

>  NOTE: All comments attached to this mail WILL NOT BE PROCESSED! Only comments on the wiki page will be answered and worked on!

It is your choice but it means that you are likely to miss some comments, and encounter them as explanation of "no" votes.

Productive comments should be pulled into consideration now.

--TBKMrt (talk) 12:19, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

2

May 8 15:45:29 UTC 2019, marc marc:

- I see no need to specify that a country's roads are in that country.
- I have always considered strange a vignette is considered as a toll.
- the toll detail would better be added on the highest entity containing the type of toll concerned (e.g. on the Swiss relationship for the Swiss vignette or on a Brittany relationship to say that there is no payment in Brittany) rather than duplicate the same information many times.
- if you want to add details of the fee, use the fee key
- to inform if it is with a ticket or rfid, used a dedicated key, especially since in France, both are possible on the same routes. it also allow to use this key for other feature (like paking fee)
- type in toll:type is a no meaning key. it's better to use a key with a "self-meaning" (like calculation_basis) but from your examples, it seems that all vignettes are based on a duration, so what's the added value to duplicate vignette with time ? and to say that the payment of a tunnel is based on distance seems wrong (it's a fixed price for the tunnel, you can't paid less or more than the fixed price for a kind of vehicule)
- toll:type=time gives me the impression that the payment is made according to the time you use the road (if you drive fast, you pay less than the one who drives slowly). out of the description speaks of a subscription for a certain duration. it is not intuitive. again a lot of roads have one-shoot and subscription payement.

Country tags: There is no worldwide toll system. There is not even an EU-wide system. So if you want to use toll roads in Germany, but not in Poland you need a way to tag the roads or you can not select them with a routing tool.

If you have to pay to use a road it is a toll. That it's a different type of toll is collected in toll:measure where you can use time (pay once for set ammount of days/weeks/years) or distance (pay per use). The system used differs not only from country to country, but also for different for types of vehicles in the same country (eg. regular cars and hgv)

We can also use different keys with different tags for them. I want to avoid using 5 different keys for an information where two keys are enough. I was waiting for suggestions or discussion input, but I didn't really get any.

toll:type is already renamed to toll:measure

there are more options for time other than the vingnette so different combinations are possible. distance is just something that came up in previous discussions. if the majority wants something like per-use I would be fine with that. It's again that I'm missing constructive input. both are just to seperate roads that you pay once and can use as much as you like or you have to pay everytime you drive on them.

--TBKMrt (talk) 12:50, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

Nov 12 00:01:20 UTC 2019, marc marc:

the same apply for parking no the same-for-all-parking exist, but we still avoid using a country code to said that all parking in this country use somethink specific to this country. the same apply with opening hours, we don't add country code to spécify that's it's this country timecode

I would not use any country code if it would not seem necessary to me.

The issue still is how can you tell a routing system to use toll roads in one country while avoid them in the other. To make it easier to understand the problem I see: You Travel from Germany through Austria to Italy. You want to use the toll roads in Germany and Italy, but do not want to use them in Austria. How would a routing tool avoid Austrian toll roads if all it sees is "toll=yes"

"The routing system could check if it is within the countries boudry": This is one of the thigs I have already heard. Usually it is quicker to retrieve a value from a set of information (eg. the OSM database) than it is to check within which boundry some nodes or ways are

"Area checks are not much slower than database requests": I have used a NAVI for a route of about 10km in a city. Depending on where I was and in which direction I was initially heading, between 9'000 and 11'000 roads where analysed. If it took only 1ms longer for each road (you have to check each road after all) it would result in a route calculation delay of 9 - 11 seconds. And that was only for a distance of ~10km. Imagine long distance travel with more complicated routing. You would sit and wait for one maybe several minutes. Since many smartphones are used for navigation, it would also save on battery if the phone's CPU would not have to run unnecessary calculations ad requests.

I have no problem leaving the country code off the table (or out of the tag) but not a single soul was able to tell me how the same benefit could be achieved without longer or more resource intense processing. I am still open for new suggestions though.

--TBKMrt (talk) 18:15, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

 NOTE: All comments attached to this mail WILL NOT BE PROCESSED!

so nice ! all not-processed comments may result in a vote=no or worse in difficulties of use in the future because a detected problem has not been solved

This is an open and unhidden discussion in a section of the wiki where discussion is meant to happen. Everybody is free to join and contribute to the discussion as much as they like. If a person who is going to vote (on a sidepage of the discussion page) does not want to be involved in the discussion there is nothing I can do about that. If a person wants to vote no (or yes) for whatever reason it is the person's decision alone. Everybody is free and welcome to join this discussion and raise their concerns and share ideas and thoughts. However, a serious discussion that is meant to have an effective output, needs a point where all comments are collected - and what would be a better place if not the talk page that is directly linked from the voting page?

--TBKMrt (talk) 12:50, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

3

May 10 22:23:13 UTC 2019, Warin:

No need to separate countries.

toll:type... NO. the values of time and distance indicate the fee paid will be related to those quantities ... the time one? The slower you go do you pay more or less compared to the faster vehicle???

toll:assessment=time/distance .... but not toll:type!

And of course if these comment are ignore I will vote against... Bye.

Different countries have different toll systems. Right now you can only say if you do or do not want to use any toll raods at all. If you have paied the toll for all motorways for the whole year in your home country, you may want to use the motorway when you go on vaccation. And if you don't want pay the toll in the country you go on vacation you have to seperate them in a way that is reliable. So it would make sence even for the boolean we have right now.

time and distance are variable placeholders. I'm fine with them. If someone thinks that there is a better word for said toll systems they are welcome to share them. Unfortunately, noone did so far. toll:type was already renamed to toll:measure (other suggestions are also welcome)

Everybody is free to vote for whatever they feel is the best and for whatever reason they think is the most important. If people don't want to discuss a topic on a page that is meant to host discussions that is fine to me.

--TBKMrt (talk) 13:01, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

4

May 8 18:43:00 UTC 2019, Paul Allen:

Only one person (that we know of) wants the new scheme. Others, like myself, haven't mapped a toll, may never map a toll, and comment on the proposal in order to try to improve it even though they may never use it. Because we all benefit from a rational mapping scheme and all suffer from a badly-conceived one.

Question: which of those people should be prepared to do the most work by dealing with a method of communication they do not prefer? Those who didn't see a need for the change in the first place or the person wanting the change?

I don't know anybody who is specialised in mapping toll. If there is, the person is very much invited to join the conversation. I think the mailing list only knows of one person because that one is actually that one who bothered to share the discussion on the mailing list. All ideas are welcome and should be shared.

However, if OSM suffers map detail that other routing tools already provide, OSM will fall behind in map quality. The place of discussion should not effect the map's quality.

--TBKMrt (talk) 13:18, 11 August 2019 (UTC)