[OSM-talk] [RFC] highway=unclassified currently is too ambiguous, so here's my proposal to fix it.
Richard Fairhurst
richard at systemed.net
Wed Aug 5 18:37:39 BST 2009
John Smith wrote:
> That isn't the point, the same key/value pair is being used for 2
> completely different purposes
No, it isn't. highway=unclassified has, and always has had, a consistent
meaning.
If you are using highway=unclassified in a residential area to mean "less
significant than highway=residential", you're doing it completely contrary
to standard practice. Therefore you are by definition wrong.
Where we fail is that we don't have anything less significant than
unclassified for non-residential areas. In particular, country roads that
aren't particularly routable, but still have a passable standard of upkeep
(i.e. a road, not a track).
highway=minor would work, or even your suggested highway=rural - but _not_
as a replacement for unclassified in rural areas, but rather, an addition.
cheers
Richard
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/-RFC--highway%3Dunclassified-currently-is-too-ambiguous%2C-so-here%27s-my-proposal-to-fix-it.-tp24821055p24832503.html
Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
More information about the talk
mailing list