[Talk-lt] Upgrading E-Roads to trunks (fwd)

[Albertas Agejevas]

----- Forwarded message from Albertas Agejevas <alga at pov.lt> -----

From: Albertas Agejevas <alga at pov.lt>
Subject: Re: [Talk-lt] Upgrading E-Roads to trunks
To: Denis Chapligin <akashihi at gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2009 23:54:12 +0200

On Tue, Dec 01, 2009 at 08:11:49PM +0200, Denis Chapligin wrote:
> > In principle I'm not opposed to marking E-roads as trunk.  The
> > arguments for in in Lithuania would be a more cohesive road network on
> > low zoom levels.  Another argument would be better harmonisation with
> > Latvia and Belarus, as well as RF, where a similar policy is already
> > in place for different reasons.  However by and large Lithuania is
> > looking towards the West :)  If we look at Poland, they are very fair
> > in tagging roads as trunk.  Only fast, dual carriageway roads are
> > marked so there.
> >
> >
> As far as i know, Belarus and RF are already moving for a new marking policy
> and i've heard that there are some discussions about it in Polish community.
> 
> 
> > On the other hand, I see distinct value in having 'trunk' mean road
> > condititions, rather than route importance.  There is a distinct
> > difference between simple, good quality 10 m wide roads such as
> > A12/E77, fast, dual carriageway roads such as A1 between Vilnius and
> > Kaunas (almost a motorway, but towing, bycicles allowed, stopping on
> > the shoulder/emrgency lane is allowed, 100 km/h speed limit), and A1
> > between Kaunas and Klaipėda (restricted access, 130 km/h motorway).
> > This distinction would be lost if we tagged all E-roads as trunk.
> >
> 
> You're right! But there are lot of 'road condition tags' like
> 'surface','lanes','maxspeed' etc So with the new marking scheme every road
> could have a two independent property sets - road's physical conditions(tags
> mentioned above) and road importance for travellers (highway,ref,etc) Sounds
> reasonable, isn't it?

But only the highway tag is currently used to determine the graphical
representation of the road, and that's what matters in the end, if
we're making a map :-)

In principle I agree that classifying trunk/primary/secondary by
importance rather than conditions makes sense for a worldwide map.
Speaking of Lithuania, if this proposal is implemented, perhaps the
whole intercity road network has to be promoted one level up, as it is
in Latvia.  The current main road network (magistraliniai keliai,
магистральные дороги) is quite sparse, so it would not look wrong if it
was all trunk.

> > > PS: i'll be in Vilnius next week, so we may discuss it with help of
> > > Vilkmergės alus :)
> >
> > Ooops, too late :)
> >
> > I usually go to Vilnius every 3-4 monthes :-)

Alright, drop me a line the next time you're here then!

Albertas

----- End forwarded message -----