[Talk-us] Trunk versus motorway

Ian Dees ian.dees at gmail.com
Mon Dec 3 00:39:35 UTC 2018


Hi folks,

This conversation is over. If we can't have a conversation about highway
tagging without making personal attacks, then we can't have the
conversation.

Please work harder to stay on topic, have empathy towards your fellow
mapper, and have constructive conversations.

The mailing list is in "emergency moderation" mode for the night.

-Ian

On Sun, Dec 2, 2018 at 6:30 PM Nathan Mills <nathan at nwacg.net> wrote:

> The reason you don't get it is because you are not listening. Nobody has
> said the motorway tagging should continue through the intersection. The
> debate is entirely about where the classification change takes place. There
> are several instances in Arkansas where a motorway ends similarly. In
> AHTD's highway log, they cease to be a motorway wherever legal access
> control or the character of the road changes. Sometimes they do make the
> demarcation at an interchange (usually at the point where the intersecting
> roadway crosses) when the continuation is a short distance.
>
> Given Arkansas law, the state's view is nearly always easily seen from
> speed limit signs thanks to very specific per se speed limits based on
> highway classification. Sadly (for this particular discussion), Oklahoma
> doesn't, though speed limit changes do often accompany clear changes in
> roadway classification.
>
> The overall point being that there are in fact times when classification
> changes at a place other than an interchange.
>
> It's been many years, but I recall there being a speed limit reduction
> northbound coming down the hill to the intersection in question. And again,
> I fail to see how adding an intersection magically changed the 3/4 of a
> mile between Apache and where the median disappears to accommodate the
> Gilcrease intersection. (I incorrectly called the extension past the
> Tisdale Apache in a previous message. I forget the actual name, west of the
> Tisdale, but it has one that is not Gilcrease)
>
> It would be nice if you would stop acting as if there is no room for
> reasonable people to have differing opinions on this since even various
> state governments have differing opinions on the matter. It's mildly rude
> to pretend that yours is the only logical possibility, especially when
> several people have considered your argument and still don't agree.
>
> All that said, at the moment you're the only person currently local to the
> instant case, so given the guideline that encourages us to defer to local
> mappers if their edits aren't broken in some technical way or obviously
> depart from reality, you're more than welcome to tag it the way you did if
> you like.
>
> Still, it was a change from what another local had tagged originally. The
> TIGER import became irrelevant in relation to this discussion when someone
> took the time to add the other carriageway. This isn't a situation where
> the edit in question was being made to a way that was created by the TIGER
> import and not touched by anybody except a few bots since, so the norms
> surrounding that scenario aren't applicable.
>
> -Nathan
>
> On December 2, 2018 5:03:31 PM EST, Paul Johnson <baloo at ursamundi.org>
> wrote:
>>
>> The commonly accepted definition of freeways in the US excludes surface
>> junctions, whereas expressways (trunks) does include intersections.  I
>> honestly am surprised a group of roadgeeks isn't more attuned to this
>> distinction.
>>
>> On Sun, Dec 2, 2018 at 3:15 PM Adam Franco <adamfranco at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, Dec 2, 2018 at 1:36 AM Paul Johnson <baloo at ursamundi.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sun, Dec 2, 2018 at 12:30 AM Bryan Housel <bhousel at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I do understand your point, but a dozen or so people on talk-us and
>>>>> the six or so people on that changeset 64919426
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Well, 1 person, an AA roads troll and like 5 sockpuppets.  There's also
>>>> a number of people in this thread that do agree with me.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> discussion all disagree with you.  Is there nothing that would make
>>>>> you reconsider?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Get the commonly used definition of a freeway changed to include
>>>> intersections.  Good luck!
>>>>
>>>
>>> Since you are asking for more declaration of support/opposition, I'm a
>>> relatively disinterested-in-motorways mapper that has been following along
>>> with this thread. Paul, I think your read of a motorway definition is
>>> overly rigid and I agree with Richie, Bryan, and the others that a motorway
>>> classification may continue beyond the last interchange.
>>>
>>> If one is traveling past the last interchange one may be traveling in a
>>> "motorway zone" where high speeds, grade separation of crossing roads, dual
>>> carriageway, etc all continue to exist. As Richie pointed out, there will
>>> be some place where "caution freeway ends", "intersection ahead" or slowing
>>> speed limit signage indicates a transition out of the motorway zone to
>>> something else. That seems like a vastly more appropriate place to change
>>> the tagging from motorway to trunk/primary. Choosing the point of the last
>>> interchange doesn't make sense as there may be many miles on both sides of
>>> the last interchange where the roadway is functionally the same -- where
>>> standing and looking at the road it shows all of the characteristics of a
>>> motorway. It is confusing to think that an at-grade intersection far over
>>> the horizon would force a long final segment of road to change
>>> classification.
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Talk-us mailing list
>>> Talk-us at openstreetmap.org
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>>>
>>
> --
> Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/attachments/20181202/100d9060/attachment.html>


More information about the Talk-us mailing list