"Tagging freeway ending/beginnings with this scheme is definitely not
standard practice in the US"
By "this scheme," do you mean motorway up to intersection or motorway only
up to last ramp merge? The former is almost everywhere in the US and I very
rarely see the latter. Even after browsing the
> Can I get some voice of reason in
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/64919426? There seems to be quite
> a few people (and one AARoads forum troll egging it on) that are trying to
> propel the idea that motorways have at-grade intersections, which is
> obviously incorrect.
I know I'm
On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 8:28 PM OSM Volunteer stevea <
stevea...@softworkers.com> wrote:
> In Santa Cruz, there is about 50 meters of highway=trunk between Highway
> 17 (freeway, motorway) and where 17 ends at signalized Ocean Street
> (highway=primary). At first I was nonplussed about this
I'm largely in agreement and this seems like how it's been done in
practice. Would also apply to WA 500 (which also should be a trunk east of
I 205, if not at least 112th/Gher; with argument supporting 205 being that
112th/Gher is largely only used by way of it's I 205 North exit and
supporting
Eric Ladner wrote
> That may be more of a note to motorists that "hey.. this freeway is coming to
> an end" rather than an absolute marker of "this freeway ends here at this
> sign". San Diego's own GIS system has it marked as I-8 all the way up to
> where it splits into motorway links at
Bryan Housel writes:
> Can’t a motorway begin or end at an at-grade intersection though?
Certainly, and I think the question is how long does a stretch of road
that meets motorway specs have to be to be tagged motorway. The basic
issue is that "not having at-grade intersections" is not a local
That may be more of a note to motorists that "hey.. this freeway is coming
to an end" rather than an absolute marker of "this freeway ends here at
this sign".
San Diego's own GIS system has it marked as I-8 all the way up to where it
splits into motorway links at Nimitz/Sunset Cliffs.
Arguing
The numbering is consistent only within a single National Forest and
numbers will likely repeat even where multiple national forests are
contiguously adjacent. The numbers are unique within each individual
forest, though.
On Thu, Nov 29, 2018, 16:21 Tod Fitch
> > On Nov 29, 2018, at 1:28 PM,
As Paul said, it depends on the type of road. In Georgia, the signage
has been the brown keystone one for roads that mere mortal cars can
drive on:
https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/HD_cjbQunrGWEQCViX-Now
And the vertical ones with FS on them for people with more advanced vehicles:
On Thu, Nov 29, 2018, 14:14 Kevin Broderick Doesn't the Forest Service use FR for "Forest Road" at the reference? I'd
> think that, or NFR to distinguish from state forest roads, would be the
> more appropriate ref, as FS is ambiguous (it doesn't distinguish between a
> forest road and a forest
Doesn't the Forest Service use FR for "Forest Road" at the reference? I'd
think that, or NFR to distinguish from state forest roads, would be the
more appropriate ref, as FS is ambiguous (it doesn't distinguish between a
forest road and a forest trail).
(c.f.
Oh I am so happy that Frederik brought this up. I've been thinking
about this topic for a while, but just haven't said anything. I love
the ensuing discussion, too.
So, first, the wiki page on now to tag the refs
On Thu, Nov 29, 2018, 00:17 Albert Pundt or if the road becomes single-carriageway and isn't a super-2 (a
> controlled-access freeway in which only one carriageway is constructed with
> accommodation for the second later).
>
A controlled access single carriageway would also be a trunk, not a
Even at the end, that's still an intersection, though. In the real world,
there's a transition to be mafe from freeway to that less than freeway
situation at the traffic light.
On Wed, Nov 28, 2018, 23:02 Evin Fairchild What?! I haven't contradicted myself at all. I already said in my initial
>
14 matches
Mail list logo
