[Talk-us] Fwd: Trunk versus motorway

Paul Johnson baloo at ursamundi.org
Thu Nov 29 03:21:41 UTC 2018


On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 9:00 PM Evin Fairchild <evindfair at gmail.com> wrote:

> I think you're misrepresenting the discussion. People are simply saying
> that the motorway destination should extend all the way to the first at
> grade intersection, rather than the interchange prior to the at grade
> intersection. Personally, I agree with this. The only exception would be if
> there's an at grade intersection sandwiched between two interchanges. In
> that case there should be a stretch of trunk in between the two
> interchanges.
>

Right, but motorways are grade-separated, fully controlled, dual
carriageways.  Throw in an at grade intersection, that's no longer grade
separated.  That's not a freeway anymore, that's an expressway.
Expressways are semi-controlled and do have surface intersections, though
some or even most may be grade separated.


> Further, I strongly disagree with the way the Tisdale was originally
> tagged, (the entire thing, even the obvious freeway sections were
> originally trunk) because if we followed Paul's logic everywhere, most odd
> numbered 3 digit interstates would have to be tagged as trunk.
>

Well, let's talk about that.  There's quite a few out there that probably
shouldn't be motorways, but instead motorway_link or trunk.  I 90 west of I
5 is mapped a motorway right now but it's just a spiderweb of ramps to the
Seattle Bus Tunnel, 5th Avenue, Seattle Boulevard, 4th Avenue, and
Martinez.  Rationale for going from the US 412 interchange being that's the
last (only, really) major junction along Tisdale with an unambiguous
motorway.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/attachments/20181128/57b1815a/attachment.html>


More information about the Talk-us mailing list