[Talk-us] US highway classification

Anthony osm at inbox.org
Sun May 29 05:13:33 BST 2011


On Sat, May 28, 2011 at 11:29 PM, Nathan Mills <nathan at nwacg.net> wrote:
> Obviously, my preference would be that trunk only be used for roads with
> more than two lanes and a barely-existent shoulder, but barring that I would
> like it to mean 'very important road that is not a motorway.'
>
> And yes, as it presently stands, a routing engine would probably be better
> off using the two foot shorter primary than the two foot longer trunk, given
> that we have a bunch of roads tagged as trunk that are no more suitable for
> long distance travel than most roads tagged as primary.

Within the same geographic area?  I mean sure, there's a trunk in
Grove Hill, Alabama which is worse than a primary in Tampa, Florida.
But so long as there aren't any trunks in Grove Hill, Alabama which
are worse than primaries in Grove Hill, Alabama, I think the routers
and renderers should do okay.

If you want to get people to tag "more than two lanes" and "a
barely-existent shoulder", I think you'd have much more success
creating tags for those features than convincing people that their
area of the country isn't allowed to have any trunks.



More information about the Talk-us mailing list