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

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2009/7/31 Martin Simon <grenzdebil at gmail.com>:
> 2009/7/31 Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdreist at gmail.com>:
>> "This tag is used for roads accessing or around residential areas but
>> which are not a classified or unclassified highway.
>> This is a useful guideline if you are not sure whether to use
>> "residential" or "unclassified" for streets in towns:
>>    * unclassified - a wider road used by through traffic
>>    * residential - a narrower road generally used only by people that
>> live on that road or roads that branch off it. "
> This definition od residential/unclassified was added not long ago by
> some person from the german mailing list(at least he started the
> discussion. maybe someone else changed it, can't check at the moment,
> the wiki is under maintenance...). I think you know that.

no, actually I am not aware that there were some recent changes, but I
was myself seeing and using this hierarchy (unclassified above
residential) since I am mapping (Jan 08), so I would also agree to
this modification if it was (formally in the wiki) just a recent one,
which I doubt (I remember some personal talk with local mappers here
in the last year who saw this exactly the same way, so I don't think
this is just my personal believe. I also remember that Frederik Ramm
wrote in the German ML that he doesn't use unclassifieds in towns or
villages.

> We had residential and unclassified as equal classes for ages now and
> the only difference was the question wether or not it is in some
> residential area. Then suddenly this person came up with desperately
> needing a road class between tertiary and residential.
> "This is not a problem, just add some new class...", one may think,
> but instead he wanted to re-define a tag that was in use for a very
> long time with another definition and this, in my eyes, is _not_ OK
> and a very bad idea.

I don't really see, why this is so bad in this case. IMHO there won't
be any change of tags necessary in the maps (unclassified was before
and after the lowest class (of real roads, i.e. not service and
tracks) in both: urban and rural areas, so where's the problem?).

> It's basically the same mistake as "suddenly, all highway=footway are
> a shortcut for highway=path, foot=designated", which is simply not
> true, because "footway" has been used with some other definition
> before highway=path & *=designated came up...

never used path in my life (I tag them footway and if bikes are
allowed bicycle=yes) so don't see the point.

Cheers,
Martin