[Tagging] highway=residential_link

[Mateusz Konieczny]

On Wed, 11 Nov 2015 04:57:45 -0600
Paul Johnson <baloo at ursamundi.org> wrote:

> 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

I would not use *_link in such situation.