[Talk-GB] C roads again

[Philip Barnes]

On Wed, 2014-08-13 at 07:37 +0100, Lester Caine wrote:
> On 13/08/14 01:22, Robert Norris wrote:
> > However I am in favour of this edit, but I think the edit needs to *only* change 'C' Roads, as some B roads are tagged tertiary.
> Ditto.
> But it's a bit like the 'name' problem where a few roads have locally
> known names, but these are not displayed on signs :( Need recording but
> not necessarily displaying.
I think thats an important point, there are many such roads in
Shropshire too. There needs to be a way of navigating to an address on
these roads, but we do need a method of indicating to the end user that
there is no sign, partly to tell routers to not say turn left into x
road, but also to give confidence to someone that they really are in the
right place when they haven't seen a sign. 

name:unmarked maybe an option.
> 
> On a slightly different tack, the tertiary road designation is more of a
> problem. While not advocating 'tag for routing', this is one that is
> making my own use of OSMAND almost impossible, and I can't believe
> others don't find the problem. It refuses to use the B4632 ( used to be
> the A46! ) going north from here, and I can't trace why. Roads south are
> a similar problem, but these a good quality 'C' roads. Should they be
> 'upgraded' to secondary or should the distinction be removed in OSMAND
> for UK roads?  If I can't trust local routing why should I at a new
> destination and we are talking a several mile detour here which can add
> 30mins to the journey.
> 
I do think this is a router problem, they really do overuse the highway
type tag.

Often I have found routing problems can be fixed by simply mapping the
speed limits. Not tagging for the renderer/router, but ensuring it has
more malformation to work to.

The current fad of reducing speed limits on primary A roads will make
this even more important.

Phil (trigpoint)