[Talk-ca] Proposed changes to road classification and related stuff

[Jherome Miguel]

Well, the availability of motorist services is also something US mappers
has been taking in account where to put up a trunk routing, especially
where there are alternatives. As in the case of Rouyn-Noranda/Val
d'Or/Temiskaming Shores to Alma/Saguenay, I can agree; the routing through
boreal forest is not a viable trunk corridor due to its remoteness (the few
possible stopovers are with reserves. A highway that does get closed during
winter, lacks maintenance or has no services for a significant distance,
even if it's in the the fastest or shortest route between two cities as
being suggested by a router, is obviously not a good trunk candidate unless
there are no other alternatives. I can say highway classification generally
benefits the users of the static map, not of GPS routers. How NHS core
routes are determined is somehow hazy, but most corridors will have
stopovers with a decent number of motorist services.

On Thu, Feb 10, 2022 at 4:44 PM Pierre Béland <pierzenh at yahoo.fr> wrote:

> Ce qui est proposé ici est de modifier la classification pour un meilleur
> rendu sur la carte à des zooms inférieurs ou pour influencer la
> priorisation de routes particulières dans les outils de navigation
> routière. Il est habituellement déconseillé par la communauté OSM d'agir
> ainsi.
>
> Vs route Rouyn-Noranda–Saguenay
>
> De Val-D'or - Vers Saint-Felicien, Saguenay et même Tadoussac, les outils
> de navigation empruntent bien la route du nord. De même, la route du nord
> est empruntée à partir de Temiskaming Shores, ON.
>
>
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/directions?engine=graphhopper_car&route=48.102%2C-77.788%3B48.143%2C-69.717#map=7/48.969/-73.740
>
> De Mont-Laurier au sud du Parc de la Vérendry, ou encore à partir de
> North-Bay, ON. il y a un basculement vers la route du sud, ce qui fait du
> sens avec distances - temps plus courts.
>
>
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/directions?engine=fossgis_osrm_car&route=46.552%2C-75.497%3B48.143%2C-69.717#map=7/46.909/-72.609
>
> Lorsque nous choisissons un trajet, d'autres facteurs sont à considérer
> dont le peu de services sur la route du nord et possiblement une chaussée
> plus abimée avec les nombreux camions lourds qui empruntent de telles
> routes. Les services routiers en cas d'urgence peuvent aussi être à des
> centaines de km de distance.
>
> Pierre
>
>
> Le jeudi 10 février 2022, 17 h 08 min 46 s UTC−5, Jherome Miguel <
> jheromemiguel at gmail.com> a écrit :
>
>
> It's not just about keeping up with changes in the border, but I find
> there need to a lot more trunk routes so to highlight other important road
> links between important regional population centres (in here as well as in
> the US), not just ones defined by a committee of provincial and territorial
> transportation ministers.  Yes, a trunk network based on the NHS core
> network may be okay and is mostly well-connected so to say the least, and
> we can leave that as it is, but we should try to highlight other key
> connections (e.g. Barrie/Toronto/Kitchener-Waterloo/London–Owen Sound, Red
> Deer–Saskatoon, Medicine Hat-Lloydminster, Rouyn-Noranda–Saguenay without
> passing through the St. Lawrence valley, North Battleford-Prince Albert,
> Prince Albert-Yorkton without passing through Saskatoon), and relying
> solely on a highway being a NHS core route can reveal connectivity gaps,
> especially when viewing the map at lower zooms. Connectivity is an current
> issue as with BC 99 (Sea to Sky Highway), which ends at Whistler rather
> than continuing up to the Cariboo; the BC 99 trunk status being based on
> where it's an NHS route.
>
> On Thu, Feb 10, 2022 at 10:22 AM Iain Ingram <iain at monkeyface.ca> wrote:
>
> 
> I certainly wouldn’t say this mail list doesn’t have mappers from the west
> on it. I am also in Alberta. I would have to agree with Martin. What is
> broken and what is the benefit of this fix? I am not suggesting it is not
> valid but I am curious what brought this up as a need.
>
> Iain
>
> On Feb 10, 2022, at 07:42, Martin Chalifoux via Talk-ca <
> talk-ca at openstreetmap.org> wrote:
>
> On this statement below, I will ask again, what is it that is broken ?
> What is it that needs fixing ? It may be obvious to you that it needs
> fixing but for many experienced mappers the trunk tag is just fine and
> there is nothing wrong with it. So in a sentence or two, not a one pager,
> can you explain what is it that needs fixing. That they have done something
> in the USA is not the answer. Thank you.
>
>
>
> On Feb 10, 2022, at 09:21, Jherome Miguel <jheromemiguel at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On the trunk==expressway thing, I’ll still be willing on dealing with
> those. People south of the border are already dealing with it, and why not
> us which still do have a bunch?
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20220210/3efc6dc0/attachment-0001.htm>