[Tagging] Proposed features/Connecting of routes - RFC

[Dinamik]

on the one hand, connecting roads between e-roads, as you said, are
not fully parts of e-road network, because such connecting roads are
not formally marked as e-roads, on the other hand, connecting roads
are necessary parts of e-road system as a united network: without such
connection roads the network is logically unfinished;

I've added words about "network=e-road_link";

--------------

2013/3/14 Kytömaa Lauri <lauri.kytomaa at aalto.fi>:
>>Description:
>>type=route - this is a route
>>route=road - this is a route for motorcars
>>network=e-road - this is a cars' route, which is related
>>to E-road network
>
> IMO network=* should be read as "is a route, which is a
> part of the E-road network". These connections are not
> a real part of the agreed-on network, but local roads and
> links that act as a tool to route between them. Therefore,
> I'd say it would be better to differentiate these already
> at the network tag; say, network=e-road_link
>
> Also, they exist where two E-roads intersect at a grade
> separated junction, but the connecting links are not a
> part of either route relation. If they were a part of the
> e-road relations, there would also be some other onramp
> link roads, ones that get traffic from local roads and
> which are guideposted just as the connecting ramps
> between actual E-roads. There's less room for random
> inclusions, when these instruments to routing are a
> separate network=*, one which osm mappers are
> constructing on their own.
>
> Btw, maybe just a tag would suffice?
>
>>e-road=A_link - this is a connecting route between two
>>European routes
>
> What are A and B class E-roads? Which one should one use,
> when it's a connection between an A and a B class route?
> Even if they don't exist now (do they?), they might exist
> in the future.
>
> --
> Alv
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging