[OSM-talk] Misclassified roads
steve at nexusuk.org
Thu Jul 10 09:41:42 BST 2008
On Wed, 9 Jul 2008, David Earl wrote:
> We've gone round and round the issue of what road classification means many
> times before. With a few dissenters, the consensus has generally been that
> you tag what you find on the ground. This sometimes contradicts the
> "official" classification. Some people who have had access to this
> information have used different tags to apply the "official" classification
> (though I do wonder about the copyright status of such information).
You misunderstand the problem - the problem isn't that the classification
on OSM doesn't match the official classification. The problem is that
until highway=road was approved, there was no classification for "it's a
road but I can't remember what type", so people have used
highway=unclassified so that the road at least gets rendered. This means
that most roads tagged as highway=unclassified are most definately not
unclassified roads "on the ground" - they are residential, tertiary,
secondary or even primary roads.
If a road is tagged as highway=unclassified, it should be a relatively
narrow road - it should not be a wide residential road with houses down
both sides, or a dual carriageway.
xmpp:steve at nexusuk.org sip:steve at nexusuk.org http://www.nexusuk.org/
Servatis a periculum, servatis a maleficum - Whisper, Evanescence
More information about the talk