[Talk-us] Another road classification disagreement (this time with HFCS in Kansas)

[Greg Troxel]

"Richie Kennedy" <richiekennedy56 at gmail.com> writes:

> To me, "unpaved" includes gravel surfaced roads (which is the
> predominant surface type of non-state highways in rural Kansas). I'm
> not inclined to mark every gravel road in Kansas as 'track' 

Unpaved does not at all imply track.  If it's a real road, open to the
public, with a name, and expected to be used by normal vehicles, it's
not a track.  track is about something that is physically less than a
proper (even unpaved) road.

It's perfectly reasonable to have an unpaved highway=secondary in rural
areas, if that's one of the major roads around.

With respect to 'expressway', I would suggest that expressway is not a
useful term, because there is no agreed-on meaning.  The definition of
trunk is usually something that is fairly high speed (50 MPH ish),
mostly divided, and doesn't have that many at-grade intersections and
driveways.   Usually trunk roads feel like things are sort of heading to
being like interstates, but really aren't.

And definitely roads that are not interstates get tagged motorway, if
they meet the standards completely.  An example is Mass 2 inside 128 and
From just inside 495 west for many miles.  This is divided, on/off-ramps
only, no lights, no rotaries.  However, there is a section in between
that's mostly divided, with a light every few miles, and a few driveways
for businesses (but only 2 business driveways per mile, mostly).  It's
posted 45 and people go 60.  This feels like classic trunk, almost a
textbook definition.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 180 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/attachments/20150921/bc00afe7/attachment.sig>