<html>
<head>
<meta name="generator" content="Windows Mail 17.5.9600.20911">
<style type="text/css"><!--html { font-family: "Color Emoji", "Calibri", "Segoe UI", "Meiryo", "Microsoft YaHei UI", "Microsoft JhengHei UI", "Malgun Gothic", "sans-serif"; }--></style><style data-externalstyle="true"><!--
p.MsoListParagraph, li.MsoListParagraph, div.MsoListParagraph {
margin-top:0in;
margin-right:0in;
margin-bottom:0in;
margin-left:.5in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
}
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
}
p.MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst, li.MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst, div.MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst,
p.MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle, li.MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle, div.MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle,
p.MsoListParagraphCxSpLast, li.MsoListParagraphCxSpLast, div.MsoListParagraphCxSpLast {
margin-top:0in;
margin-right:0in;
margin-bottom:0in;
margin-left:.5in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
line-height:115%;
}
--></style></head>
<body dir="ltr">
<div data-externalstyle="false" dir="ltr" style="font-family: 'Calibri', 'Segoe UI', 'Meiryo', 'Microsoft YaHei UI', 'Microsoft JhengHei UI', 'Malgun Gothic', 'sans-serif';font-size:12pt;"><div>I am the editor in question.</div><div><br></div><div>The discussion appears to assume that roadway design conveys type. I do not necessarily agree.</div><div><br></div><div>However, I can see where some roads with a high HFCS classification may warrant a class downgrade. US 24 in Central Kansas obviously connects mainly smaller towns, whereas US 54 (which I had just re-classed as trunk a few days ago) connects larger towns and cities.</div><div><br></div><div>I would suggest the following guidance for rural HFCS:</div><div><br></div><div>Interstate: Motorway</div><div>Other Freeway and Expressway: Motorway/Trunk</div><div>Principal Arterial: Trunk/Primary [1]</div><div>Minor Arterial: Primary</div><div>Major Collector: Secondary/Tertiary</div><div>Minor Collector: Tertiary</div><div><br></div><div>[1] In rural areas, “Other Freeway and Expressway” is a subset of “Principal Arterial,” and may be marked on official state maps as the latter. If a roadway is fully controlled access, the Motorway tag should be used.</div><div><br></div><div>For urban areas, I would not make any major changes:</div><div>Interstate: Motorway</div><div>Other Freeway and Expressway: Motorway/Trunk</div><div>Principal Arterial: Primary</div><div>Minor Arterial: Secondary</div><div>Major Collector/Minor Collector: Tertiary</div><div><br></div><div>Generally, I have noticed that many urban roads will “drop class” when they transition into rural roads. Under the guidance above, most of these roadways will maintain a consistent type in OSM.</div><div><br></div><div>As to Mr. Fairhurst’s comment regarding routing, I’ll remind you it is frowned upon to tag for a routing engine. I would be happy to review the existing roadways myself to determine if they should be downgraded per any updated guidance; however, a bulk revert or manual cleanup without updated guidance will also be frowned upon.</div><div><br></div><div data-signatureblock="true"><br></div><div style="padding-top: 5px; border-top-color: rgb(229, 229, 229); border-top-width: 1px; border-top-style: solid;"><div><font face=" 'Calibri', 'Segoe UI', 'Meiryo', 'Microsoft YaHei UI', 'Microsoft JhengHei UI', 'Malgun Gothic', 'sans-serif'" style='line-height: 15pt; letter-spacing: 0.02em; font-family: "Calibri", "Segoe UI", "Meiryo", "Microsoft YaHei UI", "Microsoft JhengHei UI", "Malgun Gothic", "sans-serif"; font-size: 12pt;'><b>From:</b> <a href="mailto:richard@systemed.net" target="_parent">Richard Fairhurst</a><br><b>Sent:</b> Sunday, September 6, 2015 10:43 AM<br><b>To:</b> <a href="mailto:talk-us@openstreetmap.org" target="_parent">OpenStreetMap talk-us list</a></font></div></div><div><br></div><div dir=""><div id="readingPaneBodyContent">Richard Welty wrote:<br>> i could see having an HFCS tag which carries that value for <br>> informational purposes, but it shouldn't control our own classification.<br><br>In the UK we use the designation= tag to record official classifications<br>which might not be reflected in the highway type - I'd commend it.<br><br>Toby Murray wrote:<br>> This user has also upgraded a lot of unpaved county roads in <br>> eastern Kansas to secondary because of HFCS which also strikes <br>> me as wrong. You can clearly see where he has done this at <br>> zoom level 9 [6]. <br><br>Ye gods. That's horrid, and breaks every single car and bicycle router in<br>existence. Are those changesets cleanly revertable, or do we need a manual<br>fixup?<br><br>Richard<br></div></div></div>
</body>
</html>