[OSM-dev] [PATCH] make JOSM validator plugin ignore unnamed motorway_link

Dave Hansen dave at sr71.net
Sat Jun 2 01:58:55 BST 2007

On Sat, 2007-06-02 at 01:42 +0100, Shaun McDonald wrote:
> On 1 Jun 2007, at 23:56, Dave Hansen wrote:
> > On Fri, 2007-06-01 at 23:39 +0100, Shaun McDonald wrote:
> >> On 1 Jun 2007, at 23:10, Dave Hansen wrote:
> >>> The validator plugin likes to warn that highway=motorway_link  
> >>> ways are
> >>> unnamed.  I was under the impression that they aren't intended to be
> >>> named.  This patch makes these warnings go away.
> >>
> >> Shouldn't they be name with the motorway junction number/name?
> >> Same goes for trunk_link and primary_link.
> >
> > Sorry for my horrible US naming bias, but would this be things like an
> > exit number?
> That's right.
> Here in the UK we give motorway and trunk road junctions names and or  
> numbers. It just depends on the road.
> >
> > That makes sense for a good chunk of these, but there are also a  
> > lot of
> > motorway_links that don't have exits.  There one that I can think of
> > close to where I live where one motorway ends and dumps over to  
> > another
> > larger motorway.  There is no "exit number" for this interchange at  
> > all,
> > it's just a link from one to the other.
> And how would that junction be identified on, let's say a traffic  
> report?

Probably something like "the ramp from 217 to the Sunset Highway

Here's the interchange I'm thinking of, btw:


I would imagine, though, that all of that same information about the
ramp would be able to be derived from the map itself.  Just knowing that
a way is a highway=motorway_link, oneway, and that it has its endpoints
on two and only two named ways should be enough to name that ramp.  I
also think that these things tend to merge together in weird ways, so
I'm not sure you can really name them very precisely when multiple ramps
are merging and splitting.

Do people generally name motorway_links anyway?  I haven't run across

-- Dave

More information about the dev mailing list