[Talk-ca] Highway recoding

Adam Martin s.adam.martin at gmail.com
Fri Jul 24 11:08:13 UTC 2015


Reviewing the types that you suggest here, the result seems reasonable.
Major Canadian Highways are generally a blend of the two, I find. Type 1
trunks rely on restricted access and the main highways in cities are
generally limited in this manner. Likewise, these restrictions lift, in a
sense, outside the city where they switch to connecting major settlements
together (Type 2).

That said, I think that most would agree that the TransCanada Highway is
automatically a trunk route given that it is, at it's most basic point, the
central connection between major settlements, especially across provincial
borders. I assume that the routes that leave the TCH to go to other major
settlements would need to be at the same class as the TCH, if they are
multi-lane highways used to connect settlements. Or are we to designate
them down a classification and leave Trunk for the TCH alone?

On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 6:48 PM, Tristan Anderson <
andersontristan at hotmail.com> wrote:

>  So it seems like we're coming to some agreement.  The current Canadian
> definition based on that 2005 document should be replaced with something
> else that is consistent with the rest of the world.  Once we find this new
> definition, the appropriate wiki pages should be updated.
>
> I took a look around the world and finally saw some consistency in how
> trunk tags are used.  Stewart's guidelines are basically correct, but I
> think I can hammer out a more specific description.  There are two types of
> roads with are both usually tagged highway=trunk:
>
> (1) Limited access highways.  This is a physical description for a road
> that has some of the characteristics of a motorway.  They are often dual
> carriageways of fairly high speed.
>
> (2) Highways connecting distant population centres.  This is a functional
> description for a road where used by cars and heavy trucks travelling long
> distances or between major cities.  Although usually two lanes, in more
> remote areas these roads may have very light traffic, be unpaved, or be
> slow.
>
> In some parts of the world, like Germany, France and the eastern United
> States, all trunk roads are type (1) because long-distance travel is
> generally done on their dense networks of motorways.
>
> Conversely, in large swathes of Australia and Canada, as well as in much
> of the developing world, all trunk roads are type (2) because type (1)
> doesn't exist.
>
> The only country I noticed that doesn't follow the above scheme is Britain
> (actually just England and Wales), ironically the birthplace of the trunk.
> The designation there is used quite liberally, including even short roads
> connecting small towns and quite a few of of London's city streets.  Just
> look at England at zoom level 5 and observe how unusually green it is.
>
> I suggest using the "international" model, with types (1) and (2) above
> being tagged as trunks in Canada.  This won't change much as it largely
> coincides with how roads are already tagged.  The wiki pages can be updated
> accordingly then we can look at specific roads in BC and Québec!
>
> Any objections?
>
>
>
> > From: jfd553 at hotmail.com
> > To: scruss at gmail.com; talk-ca at openstreetmap.org
> > Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2015 10:08:44 -0400
> > Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] Highway recoding
> >
> > Thank Russel,
> > Your description is pretty close of the one I had in mind (about trunks)
> before I found the Canadian definition was referring to the mentioned
> document.
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Daniel
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Stewart C. Russell [mailto:scruss at gmail.com]
> > Sent: July-23-15 08:44
> > To: talk-ca at openstreetmap.org
> > Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] Highway recoding
> >
> > The definition of ‘trunk’ is a difficult one, if based on the UK
> understanding. Like its unwritten constitution, trunk roads in the UK are
> more on a "know it when I see it" basis.
> >
> > Pretty much the only definitions I can think of that would be generally
> applicable are:
> >
> > * a trunk road goes from one city/town to another.
> >
> > * no parking at the side of the road.
> >
> > * something above the urban speed limit applies (though there are often
> nasty brief exceptions, like a roughly 200m stretch of 30 mph that used to
> adorn the A80, dammit).
> >
> > A trunk road isn't always dual carriageway. It can have traffic lights,
> roundabouts or (rare, in the UK) stop signs. Depending on its age, it may
> bypass towns and villages. Older trunk roads may also have all the usual
> roads entering it, while newer ones are likely to have on-ramps.
> >
> > In summary, the UK definition is so riddled with unwritten exceptions
> that trying to apply it rigorously in even one province in Canada will be
> frustrating. And no matter what you do, you'll always get some rogue user
> that comes along and adds their own tagging. It's a sair fecht …
> >
> > cheers,
> > Stewart
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Talk-ca mailing list
> > Talk-ca at openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Talk-ca mailing list
> > Talk-ca at openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-ca mailing list
> Talk-ca at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ca/attachments/20150724/59421673/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Talk-ca mailing list