[talk-au] Highway Tags

[Ian Sergeant]

"Brent Easton" <b.easton at exemail.com.au> wrote on 03/12/2007 09:59:36 AM:

> We have a limited range of road types available in OSM to fit the
> real road types into. We have to make decisions on where to split them
up.

> I think splitting Auslink into trunk and A roads into Primary is
> wrong. There is virtually no difference between these two sets of
> roads except in funding Source.

Well in NSW Auslink identified rural road corridors are

1. Generally signposted differently (National Highway, gold shield) - this
has continued even in states where alphanumeric has been adopted.
2. Often have higher speed limits - are there any non-national highway
non-dual carriageway roads with 110km/h speed limits in NSW?
3. Are primary road corridors connecting states rather than just regional
centes - i guess this is the main point as to why i think these are trunk
roads.

> No real surprises here. They pretty much seem to be following
> highway=A, State=B.

> Agree in principle, but why not follow the lead of the other states
> that already have Alphanumeric signage where A=Trunk, B=Primary,
C=Secondary

I'm all in favour of consistency between states...

BUT..  It really does seem counter-intuitive to have
primary/secondary/tertiary roads and A, B & C roads, and not have them
correspond.  Are we condemning future OSMers to confusion?

I think if we were to suggest to the people who derived this system to map
onto the UK roads network, that the UK A roads become trunk, and B roads
become primary, C become secondary, they would think us more than a little
loopy.

I see your point, though..

Ian.