[Tagging] [Talk-us] Trunk VS primary,
djakk.geographie at gmail.com
Mon Jan 6 05:43:19 UTC 2020
Hello ! Please note that the highway tagging is designed for cars : there
should be also a highway-like tagging for trucks, for bikes, and for
Plus : there is the commuter point of view and the long-distance point of
I would vote for an importance tag, values from 1 to 6 : for some roads or
path we could reach a cool level of details : example :
We can merge : importance=6 is for cars, bikes ... and commuting and
long-distance (usually it is for a dead-end),
Importance=5 could still be called highway=unclassified.
Le dim. 5 janv. 2020 à 16:46, Fernando Trebien <fernando.trebien at gmail.com>
a écrit :
> I know this discussion is US specific, but we've struggled with
> similar issues in Brazil as well, for very similar reasons. It seems
> we've made some progress in the southern region when we chose to judge
> importance according to a somewhat simple method (it started as: trunk
> = best routes between place=city, primary = best routes between place
> = town; then we refined the population targets for each level), with
> the cost of requiring some discussion for uncommon corner cases (such
> as when the best route between a pair of large cities actually takes
> unexpectedly undeveloped roads). Some requirements based on structure
> are still in place (primaries must be paved, motorways must be
> divided, but trunks don't have to be divided). We've also assumed that
> routing quality can only be achieved after mapping speed limits and
> surfaces and cannot depend entirely on classification. It is still an
> experimental approach, but it seems like mappers and users are much
> more satisfied now. For verifiability, after a consensus was reached,
> we documented everything in the wiki. It's a lot of work, but maybe
> something like this would work in the US as well.
> On Fri, Dec 27, 2019 at 3:39 PM Paul Allen <pla16021 at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, 27 Dec 2019 at 17:09, yo paseopor <yopaseopor at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> You lost my point of view:(WHICH) the best (or worst) conditions for a
> road you can find in a country. In some countries will be seem like a
> motorway, in other countries or zones will be a sand track. And the other
> focus: WHO can know these conditions (local communitters, people who lived
> in the country, etc.) .This is an issue OSM will have to front some day.
> And some day we will have an agreement about it.
> > We're actually conflating several issues:
> > 1) Road construction (paved/unpaved).
> > 2) Number of lanes.
> > 3) Central barrier yes/no.
> > 4) Entry/exit types (simple junctions/roundabouts versus motorway on/off
> > 5) Legislation (kinds of traffic, stopping, etc).
> > 6) Routeing preference:
> > a) Speed
> > b) Distance
> > In some countries, like the UK, these factors are all generally
> well-correlated. To
> > a degree. Good routes between important destinations tend to get good
> roads. Other
> > places, good routes between important destinations get bad roads, but
> they're still
> > the best roads around.
> > I think we need to start splitting up these attributes into different
> tags and leave it
> > to editors to offer the appropriate combinations for a given country.
> Then carto can
> > handle different coutries differently. Preferable two renderings, one
> aimed at
> > construction (motorway down to dirt track) and the other aimed at "good
> > shame about the surface."
> > I now have a quote from Calvin and Hobbes going through my head: "And
> > I'm dreaming, I'd like a little pony." It's probably insoluble but if
> it is soluble
> > it will take us decades to agree on a solution.
> > --
> > Paul
> > _______________________________________________
> > Tagging mailing list
> > Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
> Fernando Trebien
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Tagging