[Tagging] highway=residential_link

[Paul Johnson]

On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 4:46 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdreist at gmail.com
> wrote:

>
> 2015-11-11 11:00 GMT+01:00 Gerd Petermann <GPetermann_muenchen at hotmail.com
> >:
>
>> pro 2) : less confusing for those who like the duck test
>> (if there is a tertiary_link there should also be a xyz_link)
>> contra 2): more work for many people, hard to verify
>> reg. 2b)
>>
>
>
> I believe even tertiary links should be extremely rare. The roads
> typically having links are motorways, trunks and many of the primaries
> (depending on the region), some of the secondaries, rarely tertiaries (if
> ever, might also be seen as classification errors but who knows, maybe
> there is good reason in some areas for these).
>

So, how do you propose the very common situation of porkchops on tertiaries
be handled?  One such example is at 1st and Norfolk in Tulsa:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?mlat=36.15860&mlon=-95.97860#map=19/36.15860/-95.97860
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20151111/6a3d63f8/attachment-0001.html>