[Talk-us] US highway classification

[Nathan Mills]

 On Sun, 29 May 2011 02:18:09 -0400, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
> On 5/29/2011 1:50 AM, Nathan Mills wrote:

>> It's actually faster to take 441 to Yeehaw and get on the turnpike 
>> there
>> when traveling from eastern and southeastern Orlando to points south 
>> of
>> Port St. Lucie.
> Even with the four-laning of 192?

 Yes. That more people don't do it is just them being silly. Good for 
 me, I suppose.

>> Speaking of misclassification around Orlando, why on did you make
>> Alafaya Trail south of Curry Ford primary?
> To distinguish it from the adjacent secondaries, which are similarly
> more major than the tertiaries. It's a balancing act, not an exact
> science.

 Indeed, but by any standard Lake Underhill and Curry Ford are both more 
 heavily trafficked and more important than that segment of Alafaya. (for 
 now)

> We're obviously getting nowhere here. You think trunk should be used
> for certain physical characteristics, and other people think it 
> should
> be used for a slightly different set. I think a more systematic
> approach makes sense, classifying the most major routes in the system
> as trunk. Again, even under that view, there will be disagreement 
> over
> where the line is drawn. But you seem to be rejecting that it's even 
> a
> valid option, like if someone were to insist that primaries must have
> at least four lanes, or that tertiaries must have a centerline.

 I think that trunk is more useful if it's prescriptive, more along the 
 lines of a motorway than primary and below. If we aren't going to do 
 that, we need to come up with another value for highway and get it 
 rendered by default. It's something that map users expect, and we should 
 therefore deliver. Even with your view, physical characteristics are 
 part of what makes a particular route important within the network. TBH, 
 I think you overuse the trunk tag regardless of physical 
 characteristics.