[OSM-talk-be] Conventions of primary/secondary/tertiary

[Luc Van den Troost]

Hi Kenny,


I think I vaguely know that road, the section you describe, and indeed
it looks more like a very local road instead of a main road.

As most connecting, and more important roads, are secondary, it might be
wise to 'scale it down' to tertiary. 

I have been doing some mapping in the Chimay - Bouillon - Dinant area a
bit few weeks ago, and I noticed also there that some quite small roads
have a N-number, even roads where 2 trucks can't pass without stopping
and pulling over. Guess that when all roads will be mapped it will make
sense...

A similar 'downscaling' has been done in Antwerpen, where for instance
the N1 becomes 'secondary' within the ringway. Guess this can be done in
most places that have a ringway to keep transit traffic out of
towncenter. 

Luc / Speedy




On Tue, 2009-08-18 at 09:02 +0200, Kenny Moens wrote:
> Hello guys,
> 
> On the wiki page the conventions for "primary/secondary/tertiary" roads 
> are marked with question marks. Is there already a formal definition for 
> those? Until now I've always applied these rules and they apply pretty 
> good, however... some road I have problems with is the N286 connecting 
> Tildonk - Wespelaar - Wakkerzeel - Werchter, the road is still marked as 
> such in the field, both on traffic signs and on the kilometer poles, but 
> the road is (certainly the section Wespelaar - Werchter) barely 4-5m 
> wide... I don't think its a good idea to tag such a road as secondary 
> then...
> 
> Any suggestions?
> 
> Kind regards,
>