Bonjour Paul,
You actually highlight what makes me uncomfortable with the “strategic”
approach applied in many part of Canada. You are concerned about the road
network in BC; I am concerned about the network in QC. Until few months ago,
there were no trunk here; they are now everywhere.
IM
On 7/22/2015 11:43 AM, Daniel Begin wrote:
So far, I understand we have 2.5 votes for tagging trunk/motorway all
roads identified as “core route” in document (a); 0.5 against (I am
still torn between the two approaches!-)
More comments would be appreciated
Such an approach would be inconsis
Thank Tristan for your suggestions concerning the documentation.
I agree that "there's so much that needs to be added to the map that I don't
see tinkering with highway classifications as a priority". That is why
clarifying definition is necessary since some users are currently tinkering
with
As I've always understood it, highway=trunk is used for core routes in document
(a) that Daniel mentioned. It ignores routes marked as feeder and
northern/remote. highway=primary is for each province's network of primary
highways that aren't motorways or trunks.
I don't exactly agree with the
On 2015-07-22, at 10:39 AM, Daniel Begin wrote:
> Since then, the document (a) is used by some contributors to recode primary
> roads to trunk because it is cited in the Canadian tagging guideline (c).
> IMHO, the problem is that this document (a) defines 3 Route Categories (Core,
> Feeder, Nor
I would like to have community's point of view on this topic.
Recently I have seen most primary roads in my area being recoded as trunk by
at least two users. They both refer to a governmental document (a) to
justify their edits but I disagree with their interpretation. I have asked
them to di
6 matches
Mail list logo
