<html><head><style type="text/css"><!-- DIV {margin:0px;} --></style></head><body><div style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:12pt"><div style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 12pt;">I'm talking more the Alaska highway, or US 50 through rural Nevada - not driveways. Or the Transcanadian Highway ("Follow the only road. Follow the only road" - South Park). Pick up any atlas; they'll show all sorts of minor roads in desert areas. Of course, being a private drive or barely passable road is usually a reason to not show it at all.<br><br>Trunk roads and Motorways are different from primary/secondary/tertiary roads because it implies a certain physical description (I would not make Skyline a trunk road, by the way.) In Navteq data, there is a function road classification that gives the Transcanadian highway the importance as limited access highways in the US (sometimes higher; some
motorways are assigned FRC 2 in their scheme, if there's a local cluster). A motorway has significant physical differences that it ought to be rendered differently; but *when* it gets rendered is a different matter.<br><br>
If you lived in Central Nunavut (I assume that's what you're implying about your relative importance) - maybe your place *should* show up prominently on a map. Explorers getting stuck in the ice may be hungry.<br><br>-Alan<br><br><div style="font-family: times new roman,new york,times,serif; font-size: 12pt;"><font size="2" face="Tahoma"><hr size="1"><b><span style="font-weight: bold;">From:</span></b> Karl Newman <siliconfiend@gmail.com><br><b><span style="font-weight: bold;">To:</span></b> Alan Brown <adbrown1967@yahoo.com><br><b><span style="font-weight: bold;">Cc:</span></b> talk-us@openstreetmap.org<br><b><span style="font-weight: bold;">Sent:</span></b> Wednesday, December 17, 2008 10:52:55 AM<br><b><span style="font-weight: bold;">Subject:</span></b> Re: [Talk-us] Road classification<br></font><br>
On Wed, Dec 17, 2008 at 10:36 AM, Alan Brown <span dir="ltr"><<a rel="nofollow" ymailto="mailto:adbrown1967@yahoo.com" target="_blank" href="mailto:adbrown1967@yahoo.com">adbrown1967@yahoo.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div><div style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 12pt;"><div>But - what percentage of local traffic or through traffic ends up on those roads? It's relative importance that matter. If you need to go through an area - what do you take?<br>
<br>Same concept applied to city labelling - look at a globe some time. It's not unusual to see "Thule, Greenland" labelled, or "Iqaluit, Nunavut". Why? Because they're the most significant towns in the area - even though they have tiny populations.<br>
<br>On the other hand - what about San Jose, CA, 10th biggest city in the US? They always label San Francisco first - even though San Jose is bigger, with a million people. It's perceived importance.<br><br>-Alan (self-conscious resident of San Jose)<br>
</div></div></div></blockquote></div><br>Just because it's locally important doesn't make it a trunk road, though. My driveway is locally important to me and takes 100% of traffic in and out of my garage...<br>
</div></div></div></body></html>