[OSM-talk] definition of the main highway-tag

David Lynch djlynch at gmail.com
Wed Aug 5 01:17:18 BST 2009


On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 19:02, Martin Koppenhoefer<dieterdreist at gmail.com> wrote:
> 2009/8/5 Richard Mann <richard.mann.westoxford at googlemail.com>:
>> I'd agree that it should be "importance" for
>> trunk/primary/secondary/tertiary. The stuff about not using trunk for
>> single-track roads just doesn't match what people are actually doing
>> (judging by some of the roads in the Western Highlands). The physical tends
>> to align to the importance, but what we actually tend to tag is the
>> importance (usually based on the type of signs).
>
> Yes, I agree that there is some highway-types that are defined legally
> and not according to their importance (motorroad, pedestrian,
> living_street, cycleway, bridleway, etc.).
>
>> However, motorway is physical
>
> no, I don't agree. A highway becomes motorway when it get's legally
> promoted to be a motorway (by the motorway-sign this is indicated).

The USA has no such sign, nor do Canada and Mexico (AFAIK.) Do we have
no motorways?

-- 
David J. Lynch
djlynch at gmail.com




More information about the talk mailing list