[talk-au] residential and unclassified in Australia WAS definition of the main highway-tag

[John Smith]

--- On Tue, 4/8/09, Roy Wallace <waldo000000 at gmail.com> wrote:

> Sounds ok. But you would need to define "urban".

from dictionary.com:

ur⋅ban  [ur-buhn]  Show IPA 
Use urban in a Sentence
1.	of, pertaining to, or designating a city or town.
2.	living in a city.
3.	characteristic of or accustomed to cities; citified: He is an urban type.

Although the intended use is the first, urban=town/city, I very much doubt that there would be enough roads in anything smaller than a town to need a higher capacity version of a residential road.

> That definition confuses me. "Unclassified roads
> form...the...network
> of residential...ways". That doesn't make sense. Is "the
> network of
> residential and other urban road ways" highway=residential
> or
> highway=unclassified?

Someone can probably clean up my intent a little, basically what I was trying to achieve was to say unclassified roads interconnect with residential and other roads and are likely to have slightly higher volumes of traffic than residential, most europeans seem to think residential implies access=destination so they used unclassified to indicate this.

> Do you mean the following?:
> 
> 1) highway=residential is used for roads that are in any
> "urban" or
> "non-urban" areas accessing or around residential areas"
> AND are not
> "important" enough to be highway=unclassified

As far as I'm concerned highway=residential only applies to urban (town/city) areas, it doesn't apply to rural/non-urban areas.

> 2) highway=unclassified is used for roads that are in any
> "urban" area
> (including residential) that are more "important" than
> highway=residential AND are not "important" enough to be
> highway=tertiary

bingo

primary -> secondary -> tertiary -> unclassified -> residential

Which is how the Germans have been using it, and the software they write is coded to work that way.