[Talk-us] Trunk

Evin Fairchild evindfair at gmail.com
Sun Oct 15 03:18:43 UTC 2017


I'm amazed that NE2's definition hasn't been removed after 7 years. It must
not have been that controversial or else someone would have removed it.
Seems like you just don't agree with his opinion and just really have some
personal problems with that guy. I know he engaged in some really dumb
stuff like unilaterally changing all the US highways to trunk and he
ultimately got banned for a turn restriction dispute with you over a parclo
interchange in Florida, but he's not the only one who believes that many US
highways are deserving of trunk status given the amount of traffic they
receive and their importance in a region's highway network.

On Sat, Oct 14, 2017 at 8:02 PM, Paul Johnson <baloo at ursamundi.org> wrote:

>
>
> On Sat, Oct 14, 2017 at 9:43 PM, Evin Fairchild <evindfair at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Oct 14, 2017 5:41 PM, "Paul Johnson" <baloo at ursamundi.org> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Oct 14, 2017 at 7:28 PM, Evin Fairchild <evindfair at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Oct 14, 2017 4:25 PM, "Paul Johnson" <baloo at ursamundi.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Oct 14, 2017 at 6:08 PM, Evin Fairchild <evindfair at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Oct 14, 2017 2:04 PM, "Wolfgang Zenker" <wolfgang at lyxys.ka.sub.org>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> it looks to me that this discussion is going in circles, not forward
>>>> at the moment. IMHO it does not make a lot of sense to argue what might
>>>> be the true meaning of "trunk". Instead, we should concentrate on what
>>>> it should mean, document this meaning if we can agree on one and don't
>>>> worry to much about what other maps or different parts of the world
>>>> think a "trunk" is.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yeah, the whole reason why this discussion hasn't resulted in a
>>>> consensus for 7+ years is because people have dug in their heels so much
>>>> and said "trunk roads can only be divided highways, no its, ands, or buts."
>>>> I support what is written on the wiki that says that it is the second most
>>>> important road after motorway. I haven't seen a single compelling reason to
>>>> believe that trunk should only apply to divided highways. You can still
>>>> tell whether a trunk is divided at low zooms based on how thick the line is.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I'm OK with single carriageway trunks, if they're controlled access,
>>> like, say, the Chickasaw Turnpike, and similarly constructed roads.  The
>>> single carriageway parts of US 395 or US 97 in eastern Oregon, US 400 in
>>> Kansas or US 75 in Oklahoma, though?  They're all solid primaries.
>>>
>>>
>>> You actually think that US 97, the main artery thru Central Oregon that
>>> passes thru the Bend area which has a 75K population and a metro population
>>> of 100K shouldn't be connected to the outside world with a trunk road?
>>>
>>
>> Yes.  Because for the majority of that length that isn't between US 20
>> and County Road 40 is, for all practical purposes, the same generic two
>> lane, shoulderless ribbon of pavement that pretty much any two lane Texas
>> FM or RM road, or pretty much any other similar road in the American west.
>> Primary is more than ample for such a road.
>>
>>
>> That's not accurate to compare a US highway to some podunk FM/RM road out
>> in the middle of nowhere in Texas. US 97 has way more traffic and very
>> deserving of its trunk road designation. Most US highways are, except in
>> places where they parallel an interstate or other freeway. BTW, this is
>> what is written on the wiki.
>>
>
>  Which was updated by NE2 to skew towards his view of the situation.  Any
> edits by him have negative value at this point.  Disconnect his reality
> from actual reality.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/attachments/20171014/dfc42ec7/attachment.html>


More information about the Talk-us mailing list