[Talk-GB] "Trunk" vs "green-sign" routes in the UK

[David Fisher]

Ok.  So I guess I should message users Trubshaw (re A354) and UltimateKoopa
(re A22), then.
Thanks guys.



On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 2:57 PM, Tom Hughes <tom at compton.nu> wrote:

> On 22/04/13 14:44, David Fisher wrote:
>
>  I've noticed a couple of roads in the UK being downgraded in OSM from
>> "trunk" to "primary" on the basis that they are not "trunk" in the
>> County Council / DfT maintenance sense.  They are, however, "green-sign"
>> primary routes and are clearly of greater importance than your average
>> "white-sign" route.  The ones I've noticed are the A354
>> (Salisbury-Blandford) and A22 (Greater London boundary to E Grinstead).
>> Strictly speaking these changes are correct, as "trunk" in the UK
>> implies being run by the DfT rather than local councils (N.B. a large
>> number of former trunk routes have been devolved in the past 10 or 20
>> years).  But the OSM Wiki says to use the "trunk" tag for "primary A
>> road (green signs)", and this would certainly make more sense from the
>> road-user perspective.  Is there a consensus on this?  If not, might it
>> be a good idea to introduce a new tag signifying a UK "green-sign"
>> route, and for these to be rendered as such in Mapnik (i.e. in green,
>> the same as "trunk" routes)?
>>
>
> Yes, there has been a consensus for at least the last six and a bit years
> now that "trunk" in the OSM sense means green signed primary A road and
> "primary" means white signed secondary A road.
>
> Which is why the wiki says what it does.
>
> Tom
>
> --
> Tom Hughes (tom at compton.nu)
> http://compton.nu/
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/attachments/20130422/fe2e35eb/attachment.html>