<div dir="auto"><b><span style="color:rgb(49,49,49);word-spacing:1px">If I'm not mistaken, the code you linked to is specifically a set of </span><br style="color:rgb(49,49,49);word-spacing:1px"><span style="color:rgb(49,49,49);word-spacing:1px">penalties for transitioning to a lower-classed road. [1][2] This is what </span><br style="color:rgb(49,49,49);word-spacing:1px"><span style="color:rgb(49,49,49);word-spacing:1px">I was referring to earlier as "heuristics around avoiding the use of </span><br style="color:rgb(49,49,49);word-spacing:1px"></b><div class="quoted-text" style="font-size:1rem;color:rgb(117,117,117);word-spacing:1px" dir="auto"><b>lower-classed roads once you're on a higher-classed road until you get <br></b></div><b><span style="color:rgb(49,49,49);word-spacing:1px">close to the destination". For example, each transition from a </span><br style="color:rgb(49,49,49);word-spacing:1px"><span style="color:rgb(49,49,49);word-spacing:1px">highway=trunk to a highway=primary penalizes the route by 40 seconds (5 </span><br style="color:rgb(49,49,49);word-spacing:1px"><span style="color:rgb(49,49,49);word-spacing:1px">seconds with the shortest-route engine), so the routing engine would </span><br style="color:rgb(49,49,49);word-spacing:1px"><span style="color:rgb(49,49,49);word-spacing:1px">prefer a different route that stays on the trunk road for another 30 </span><br style="color:rgb(49,49,49);word-spacing:1px"><span style="color:rgb(49,49,49);word-spacing:1px">seconds based on its speed limit.</span></b><br></div><div dir="auto"><b><span style="color:rgb(49,49,49);word-spacing:1px"><br></span></b></div><div dir="auto"><span style="color:rgb(49,49,49);word-spacing:1px">Yes, but those values are assigned to the same road type within the code. A trunk road isn’t going to have a value of 5 in one place and a different value somewhere else. Doing that will make routing do some funky things. </span></div><div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Fri, Sep 17, 2021 at 16:24 Martijn van Exel <<a href="mailto:m@rtijn.org">m@rtijn.org</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div>
<p>Hi Zeke,<br>
</p>
<div>On 9/14/21 8:57 AM, Zeke Farwell wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">On Sun, Sep 12, 2021 at 7:52 PM Eric Patrick <<a href="mailto:txemt1@gmail.com" target="_blank">txemt1@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="ltr"><span style="color:rgb(80,0,80)"></span> Functional
classification isn't going for looks, though, it's going
for function. The states have spent a lot of time and
effort since FC was first introduced about a decade ago. </div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Functional classification isn't going for looks, but the
OSM highway=* classification is. [..]<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>In my mind the opposite is true, so this made me curious. In
display maps that render based on functional road classes, you
will find a consistent and complete network visualization across
map zooms, whereas OSM will display a road network with
disconnected segments. Example [1]. Or am I missing your point?<br>
</p>
<p>Martijn<br>
</p>
<p>[1]
<a href="https://tools.geofabrik.de/mc/#7/36.2888/-96.2326&num=2&mt0=mapnik&mt1=here-map" target="_blank">https://tools.geofabrik.de/mc/#7/36.2888/-96.2326&num=2&mt0=mapnik&mt1=here-map</a>
disclaimer -- I work for HERE but discussing on this list as a
private OSM citizen.<br>
</p>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br>
Talk-us mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Talk-us@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank">Talk-us@openstreetmap.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us</a><br>
</blockquote></div></div>