Bonjour Ken,
You wrote “this level of confusion just encourages me to stop contributing” …
First, do not stop to contribute! There is so much fun to map about everything
in your neighbourhood, on thematic content (biking trails, national parks … and
so on)!
Secondly, the annual report you cite
On 1/28/2016 10:31 AM, Ken Wuschke wrote:
So a suggestion to a definition for trunk routes in Canada could be a
simple as:
*A highway=trunk is a roadway that is a part of the National
Highway System as defined by the Council of Ministers
Responsible for Transportation
Morning Daniel,
First, I really appreciated your comprehensive email. It provided me with a
lot of background on this topic.
As to my level of employment within the Ministry of Transportation and
Highways, I was on the operations end and dealt directly with the public.
Through this I quickly
ope it will help
>
> Daniel
>
>
>
> *From:* Chandler Vancouver [mailto:chandler.vancou...@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* January-26-16 16:49
> *To:* Stewart Russell
> *Cc:* talk-ca
> *Subject:* Re: [Talk-ca] Highway recoding
>
>
>
> Completely agree, Stewart.
>
>
>
Hi Daniel,
I just took a look at
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Highway:International_equivalence and
the only difference between trunk and primary is the use of the *National
Highway System - Core Routes*. I actually find that document to be more
subjective then objective.
As far I as I can
On 1/26/2016 11:34 AM, Chandler Vancouver wrote:
To begin with I am relatively new to OSM but I am trying to figure the
Canadian definition for trunk status and find the current definition
as described on
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Canadian_tagging_guidelines#Trunk
as academic and
Thanks Paul!
This is much closer to how I view trunk vs. primary highways. But how can
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/ have one clear thread to users that this is
case. So far I found two, if not three, conflicting definitions for
highways in BC depending how you read through the wiki.
how can
A trunk road is not necessarily divided. The limited access part means that
it's not residential. It has to go from a town or city to another town or
city. It predates or has lesser capacity than a motorway.
It's one of these maddening "know one when I see one" definitions that
makes perfect
, Begin Daniel <jfd...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Bonjour Chandler,
>
> You have just raised an issue that was discussed last summer on this list,
> without a final agreement (search for [Talk-ca] Highway recoding).
>
>
>
> I brought the issue because I found that the gui
Completely agree, Stewart.
Similarly I live just off a road I would consider to be a tertiary level
road. It runs for only 4 km and links up residential side streets, a high
school, an elementary school and a small scale commercial zone. It is only
two lanes wide but for over 50% of its length
But there's one point on showing a route as a trunk route that I think is
important to considered. And this would be on a global level, not just for
Canada.
I use OSM on a Garmin Nuvi navigational system. If you are not familiar all
of the OSM maps can be downloaded for free for use on GPS
'; 'Tristan Anderson'
Cc: talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] Highway recoding
“… [TCH] is automatically a trunk route given that it is, at its most basic
point, the central connection between major settlements …”
Interesting… it is type 2 definition proposed by Tristan but without
-15 10:09
*To:* 'Adam Martin'; 'Tristan Anderson'
*Cc:* talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
*Subject:* Re: [Talk-ca] Highway recoding
“… [TCH] is automatically a trunk route given that it is, at its most
basic point, the central connection between major settlements …”
Interesting… it is type 2 definition
can look at specific roads in BC and Québec!
Any objections?
From: jfd...@hotmail.com
To: scr...@gmail.com; talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2015 10:08:44 -0400
Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] Highway recoding
Thank Russel,
Your description is pretty close of the one I had
Anderson
Cc: Daniel Begin; Stewart C. Russell; talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] Highway recoding
Reviewing the types that you suggest here, the result seems reasonable. Major
Canadian Highways are generally a blend of the two, I find. Type 1 trunks rely
on restricted access
with it?
Daniel
From: Tristan Anderson [mailto:andersontris...@hotmail.com]
Sent: July-23-15 17:18
To: Daniel Begin; 'Stewart C. Russell'; talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
Subject: RE: [Talk-ca] Highway recoding
So it seems like we're coming to some agreement. The current Canadian
definition based
://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Highway:International_equivalence
c) http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Canadian_tagging_guidelines
From: Daniel Begin [mailto:jfd...@hotmail.com]
Sent: July-22-15 16:44
To: 'Paul Norman'; talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] Highway recoding
Bonjour
The definition of ‘trunk’ is a difficult one, if based on the UK
understanding. Like its unwritten constitution, trunk roads in the UK
are more on a know it when I see it basis.
Pretty much the only definitions I can think of that would be generally
applicable are:
* a trunk road goes from one
-ca@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] Highway recoding
The definition of ‘trunk’ is a difficult one, if based on the UK understanding.
Like its unwritten constitution, trunk roads in the UK are more on a know it
when I see it basis.
Pretty much the only definitions I can think
On 2015-07-22, at 10:39 AM, Daniel Begin jfd...@hotmail.com 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
-guidance.pdf
f) http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:highway
From: Tristan Anderson [mailto:andersontris...@hotmail.com]
Sent: July-22-15 13:17
To: Daniel Begin; talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
Subject: RE: [Talk-ca] Highway recoding
As I've always understood it, highway=trunk is used for core
-ca] Highway recoding
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
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
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
suggested that
the current definitions (using strategic approach) are good guidelines (but
need not be followed religiously).
Other comments on the subject
Daniel
From: Paul Norman [mailto:penor...@mac.com]
Sent: July-22-15 15:59
To: talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-ca
25 matches
Mail list logo
