<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
On 9/12/2021 2:50 PM, Kevin Kenny wrote:<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CALREZe-QkXgYK0G4_B3p63uN9fMGYUvt2gnOUBE45fyS_sM3CA@mail.gmail.com">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_quote">I should have been more explicit that
this proposal is intended to dovetail with <a
href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_States/Highway_classification"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_States/Highway_classification</a>
which attempts to set out more detailed, unified project
goals. THe first sentence of the page references it, but it
should be made more obvious that it's required background
material.</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>I did read through the national classification page, though it
looks like it's been changed a few times since. It still lacks any
clear statement of goals, but that might be because it's
positioned as a documentation page not a proposal page.</p>
<p>From what I gather, the overarching goals of the NY highway
classification revamp are simple enough: a logical application of
classification tags, more in keeping with their original use
within the UK, enabling better map rendering and routing. These
probably hold true on the national level too.</p>
<p>For NY, the detailed goals appear to be:<br>
</p>
<p> - Connect all major population centers with a contiguous network
of motorway and trunk highways.<br>
- Eliminate spurs of motorway/trunk that do not terminate on a
major population center.<br>
- Eliminate islands of sub-trunk classification surrounded by
trunks (eg if a town is served by trunks from two or more
directions, the roads within the town that connect the trunks
should be tagged trunk as well.)<br>
- Eliminate island segments of higher highway classification
surrounded by segments of lower classification (although possibly
segments of motorway surrounded by trunk could be allowed in some
cases.)<br>
- Classify primarily by highways' roles in the network, not by
physical features or traffic regulations.<br>
- Prefer objective classifications derived from state DOT data
over subjective ones.<br>
- Attempt classification parity at Pennsylvania, New Jersey,
Connecticut, Massachusetts, Vermont, and Canada border crossings <br>
</p>
<p>I may have missed or misconstrued a few. </p>
<p><br>
</p>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CALREZe-QkXgYK0G4_B3p63uN9fMGYUvt2gnOUBE45fyS_sM3CA@mail.gmail.com">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div>I'd have to check on Flatbush Avenue Extension - the
table was largely produced by a script, as you probably
guessed. It could be a link road mistagged as a motorway -
there are a couple of those - or it could be the Marine
Parkway Bridge. (There are a couple of other data entry
errors I've found in the NY data set; really, all
'authoritative' data need to be taken with a grain of salt.)</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>Flatbush Avenue Extension is just that, an extension connecting
the northern end of Flatbush Avenue and the Manhattan Bridge. I
imagine they probably would have just kept the name Flatbush
Avenue except they were out of street numbers (and thankfully
chose not to use negatives.)</p>
<p>Though it is dual carriageway and features a slip lane onto
Tillary Street, it really has no motorway features. It has
at-grade crossings with stoplights and crosswalks. It's currently
(correctly IMO) tagged as primary.<br>
</p>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CALREZe-QkXgYK0G4_B3p63uN9fMGYUvt2gnOUBE45fyS_sM3CA@mail.gmail.com">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div>Definitely, NYC needs more discussion. Here, I was
trying to compare with UK tagging practice - which is the
origin of the `highway=*` classification, and held up as an
example that other nations should try to emulate. Central
London is relatively free of trunk, and even primary
roads...</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>Is it? I guess I'm not sure what qualifies as "central" but I see
plenty of primaries even within the tightest loop of trunk "A
roads". One thing I don't see, though, is motorways -- they all
terminate on the outermost trunks. If we want NYC to look more
like London, we'll have to pretend the FDR and BQE aren't
motorways.</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CALREZe-QkXgYK0G4_B3p63uN9fMGYUvt2gnOUBE45fyS_sM3CA@mail.gmail.com">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div>... they tend to terminate at ring roads and not enter
the city center as trunks/primaries, so perhaps the dearth
of trunks in the Five Boroughs and Long Island makes sense.</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>I don't think it will make sense to the NYC locals (can't speak
for Long Island which is as foreign to me as Potsdam). I think
mapping within NYC has often followed the neighborhood-as-village
paradigm, so the primaries are the major routes between
neighborhoods and boroughs. (There's some historical justification
for this -- Flatbush Avenue eg once connected the village of
Brooklyn to the village of Flatbush, through the woods and swamps.
Of course I'm sure London's chockablock with historical
justification too.)<br>
</p>
<p> But it would be good to survey some real opinions. I was cooking
up plans for some sort of mapper's delight last year but...
anyway, I'll see if anyone that I'm in touch with is interested.</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CALREZe-QkXgYK0G4_B3p63uN9fMGYUvt2gnOUBE45fyS_sM3CA@mail.gmail.com">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div>I'll say that I, at least, have no immediate plans to
have a reclassification campaign for `primary` and below.
From here on, the classification guidelines get much
rougher.</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>I'm happy to hear that, first because the criteria appear to be a
little more debatable, and second because the workload would be
enormous. <br>
</p>
<p>... Ok, I need to run out into the woods now, I'll finish reading
this message and check back into these threads when I return in a
few days.</p>
<p>Ciao!</p>
<p>J<br>
</p>
<br>
</body>
</html>