[Tagging] Local highways classifications

Andrew Errington erringtona at gmail.com
Fri Jul 17 09:29:12 UTC 2015

I actually disagree with this criticism.  I think it is appropriate to tag
a road based on its real-life designated classification.  My reason for
saying this is because it is entirely objective.  There have been similar
discussions before which generally conclude with a recommendation to make
what is essentially a subjective decision.

In a previous message I wrote what I considered to be a hierarchy of
highway=* tags.  This would be adequate for simple routers to calculate a
route.  To fix the problem routers need to look at lanes, width, speed
limits etc., and taggers need to tag these more thoroughly.  It could be
that a tertiary or unclassified road *is* better than a primary road
*because* it happens to have more lanes, or is straighter.


On Thursday, 16 July 2015, johnw <johnw at mac.com> wrote:

> Japan has a bad habit of tagging tunnels in remote mountain passes (on
> trunk roads) as motorways because they are toll roads and have no
> pedestrian traffic - but they are just a toll trunk road in a tunnel. it is
> not a motorway.
> They have an even more horrible practice of aligning the unclassified -
> trunk roads by andministrative levels - so a 100 year old national road
> which is windy and single lane is “primary” - but the modern 4 lane bypass
> road built around it 15 years ago is “tertiary” because it is a regional
> road with no shield designation.
> They want to preserve the Japanese method of displaying the routes in the
> Standard Japanese style.
> in Tokyo, it works. In the suburban countryside - it is a routing
> nightmare for western routers - as the road designations do not match their
> usage/purpose in many places.
> Breaking the “admin”  classifications off the roads usage levels would be
> very useful ONLY if there was some additional rendering of the admin
> designation levels on the road (like a different casing color or dashes or
> stronger colors or something) - something visible to go with the OSM road
> level choices so whole countries are not “mapping for the renderer".
> Javbw
> > On Jul 16, 2015, at 9:46 PM, Daniel Koć <daniel at xn--ko-wla.pl
> <javascript:;>> wrote:
> >
> > There's a lengthy discussion going on polish forum about using
> motorway/trunk tagging for our main highways:
> >
> > http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=31488
> >
> > It looks that whatever solution we will choose, there's no clear mapping
> between OSM and country-level classification of highways, so it makes sense
> to tag them also with well-known and complete local scheme, which could be
> written down like:
> >
> > highway:class:pl=S/A/GP/G
> > highway:category:pl=2/4/6/7 (the number is the same as the corresponding
> admin_level)
> >
> > I'd like to know if this scheme works also for some other (still
> probably not all) countries, so we could also use:
> >
> > highway:class:xx=*
> > highway:category:xx=*
> >
> > as a general local-level classification scheme?
> >
> > --
> > "The train is always on time / The trick is to be ready to put your bags
> down" [A. Cohen]
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Tagging mailing list
> > Tagging at openstreetmap.org <javascript:;>
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org <javascript:;>
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20150717/e9b16fc9/attachment.html>

More information about the Tagging mailing list