[Talk-GB] OSM Road Classification - Trunk/Primary
Tom Hughes
tom at compton.nu
Tue Sep 14 18:30:32 UTC 2021
Well the UK definitions are literally the originals and other
countries have attempted to align their definitions with us to
some extent though how well that can do that will vary.
I have no idea what the definition of "strategic" is because
it's a new concept I haven't encountered before.
The primary route network is a defined set of roads that
connect a specified set of primary destinations - we did
actually get a not entirely accurate list of the roads that
make it up via FOI many years ago.
The other big advantage of the primary route network as the
basis of the definition is, as somebody has said, that it's
easily detectable on the ground by green/white signage.
Fundamentally it's a deliberate break in importance of the
roads designated by government and show in signage and recognised
on basically all UK maps which render primary and non-primary A roads
differently.
Tom
On 14/09/2021 19:24, Barry McGuire wrote:
> Even if we neglect the conflicting terminology there are two issues
> remaining:
>
> 1) The OSM definition of trunk (i.e. major roads that fall short of
> motorway standards) implies a higher level of importance than many of
> the UK's primary routes.
> 2) It is exceptionally rare in other countries, particularly in Europe,
> for towns and cities to have a 'trunk' road running through their
> centres, whereas it is common on UK OSM.
>
> These two issues indicate the threshold of tagging a road as 'trunk' on
> UK OSM has been set at too low a level and should be raised. The obvious
> threshold would strategic/non-strategic, which has the added benefit of
> aligning terminology.
>
> Given there is a long history for requests to change, does this not
> indicate the current approach could be improved? If OSM's aim is to map
> the world, then shouldn't the mapping standards between countries be as
> similar as possible?
>
> Barry
>
> On Tue, 14 Sept 2021 at 18:52, Tom Hughes <tom at compton.nu
> <mailto:tom at compton.nu>> wrote:
>
> Yes it is partially a result of a misunderstanding at the
> very beginning but actually it worked out well.
>
> Whether something is actually trunk is not really that
> important - whether it is part of the primary route network
> is really what makes an A road more or less important than
> another one.
>
> There has long been consensus on the tagging, and there is
> an equally long history of new people turning up and wanting
> to change it to match the official trunk classification.
>
> Please try and forget the words "trunk" and "primary" and
> just think of them as tokens that mean more/less important.
>
> Tom
>
> On 14/09/2021 17:50, Barry McGuire wrote:
> > It's strange that the highway=primary tag is used for non-primary
> > routes, and it seems like an historical accident caused by people
> > assuming trunk roads and primary routes are the same thing, when
> they're
> > not (usually). Trunk roads form part of the strategic road
> network and
> > are managed by a highways authority (e.g. "National Highways"
> formerly
> > Highways England, and their relevant counterparts in Wales and
> > Scotland). Primary routes are selected routes between primary
> > destinations. Other A roads are roads connecting important
> (although not
> > necessarily primary) destinations.
> >
> > The Scottish OSM maps already have their strategic routes as
> trunk, with
> > all other A roads as primary, which more closely follows OSM
> terminology.
> >
> > In Wales the vast majority of their primary routes are also
> strategic
> > (trunk) routes, but not all of them.
> >
> > In England there is a proliferation of roads at the OSM 'trunk'
> level
> > which isn't seen in most other countries, especially not in town and
> > city centres. Many of the roads are currently tagged as 'trunk'
> because
> > they're primary routes but they're single carriageway, when OSM
> usage
> > indicates 'trunk' roads are 'high performance or high importance
> roads
> > that don't meet the requirement for a motorway'. This implies they
> > should be mostly dual carriageway and high importance, yet fall
> short of
> > motorway classification (e.g. A1, A11, A12, A14, A19, A2, A20,
> A23, A27,
> > A30, A31, A34, A35, A38, A4, A47, A66). This further implies that
> using
> > the 'strategic route' designation for the 'trunk' tag would be more
> > appropriate than using the 'primary route' designation.
> >
> > Proposal to align UK road types with OSM types as follows:
> > OSM Motorway = UK Motorway
> > OSM Trunk = UK strategic routes, known as 'trunk' routes
> (Currently UK
> > primary A roads)
> > OSM Primary = All other A roads (Currently UK non-primary A roads)
> > OSM Secondary = B roads
> >
> > Strategic route designations can be found by using data released
> under
> > OGLv3, just like the NaPTAN data.
> >
> > There are a few edge cases to consider:-
> > * B5093 Mosley Road, Fallowfield, Manchester is designated as a
> primary
> > route and is also a B road. Resolved by changing to strategic =
> trunk.
> > * B6261 at Shap, Cumbria linking A6 to M6 is designated as a primary
> > route and is also a B road. Resolved by changing to strategic =
> trunk.
> > * A505 and A602 between Stevenage and Luton are not primary routes
> > despite linking two primary destinations. The proposal would
> place this
> > road on the same level as all other A roads, by abolishing the
> > distinction between 'primary' and 'non-primary' A roads on OSM.
> >
> > England-Scotland border (West to East) - 2 changes at the border
> (A7 and
> > A68)
> > * M6 Motorway
> > * A7 primary route (Scotland strategic, England non-strategic)
> > * A68 primary route (Scotland strategic, England non-strategic)
> > * A697 primary route (Scotland non-strategic, England non-strategic)
> > * A1 primary route (Scotland strategic, England strategic)
> >
> > England-Wales border (North to South) - 1 change at the border (A465)
> > * A494 primary (Wales strategic, England strategic)
> > * A55 primary (Wales strategic, England strategic)
> > * A483 primary (Wales strategic, England strategic)
> > * A535 primary (Wales non-strategic, England non-strategic)
> > * A5 primary (Wales strategic, England strategic)
> > * A483 primary (Wales strategic, England strategic)
> > * A458 primary (Wales strategic, England strategic)
> > * A44 primary (Wales non-strategic, England non-strategic)
> > * A438 primary (Wales non-strategic, England non-strategic)
> > * A465 primary (Wales strategic, England non-strategic)
> > * A40 primary (Wales strategic, England strategic)
> > * A48 primary (Wales non-strategic, England non-strategic)
> > * M48 motorway
> > * M4 motorway
> >
> > Changes of designation at borders are not unusual, so I'm not
> concerned
> > about that.
> >
> > The only real downsides to this proposal are the work involved
> (which
> > shouldn't really take too long) and the loss of information about
> which
> > roads are designed as primary - which is a bit of a false
> distinction in
> > any case as primary routes do not indicate the actual standard or
> > importance of the road, just that they link two 'primary locations'.
> > Note that 'primary' locations do not mean they they're actually
> > important locations, just that they're useful for navigation
> purposes
> > (e.g. Scotch Corner as a junction, and Stevenage for itself and the
> > towns around it). The use of those locations for navigation purposes
> > made sense in the 60s but with satnavs etc the standard and relative
> > importance of the road should take priority on maps.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Barry
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Talk-GB mailing list
> > Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org <mailto:Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org>
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
> <https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb>
> >
>
>
> --
> Tom Hughes (tom at compton.nu <mailto:tom at compton.nu>)
> http://compton.nu/ <http://compton.nu/>
>
--
Tom Hughes (tom at compton.nu)
http://compton.nu/
More information about the Talk-GB
mailing list