On Jul 22, 2013 2:42 AM, "Martin Koppenhoefer"
wrote:
>
>
>
> On 21/lug/2013, at 22:26, Paul Johnson wrote:
>
> > If it has more than an exceptionally rare at-grade junction, it should
be a trunk. If it's not divided, it should be a trunk even if it doesn't
have at-grade junctions.
>
>
> for wha
On 21/lug/2013, at 22:26, Paul Johnson wrote:
> If it has more than an exceptionally rare at-grade junction, it should be a
> trunk. If it's not divided, it should be a trunk even if it doesn't have
> at-grade junctions.
for what it's worth, in Germany and Italy we use motorway on signpost
I remember this specific issue being brought up multiple times before. It's
been my understanding that this is the consensus: the pieces of I-10 and
I-40 in West Texas should be trunk wherever they have at-grade
intersections, because they have multiple at-grade intersections and not a
single rare
On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 11:58 PM, Shawn K. Quinn wrote:
> I noticed that most of these were recently changed back to motorway. Is
> this the consensus of the community at large that these should be
> motorway, or should any section with grade crossings be trunk?
>
> I'm slightly in favor of keepin
> From: Shawn K. Quinn [mailto:skqu...@rushpost.com]
> Sent: Saturday, July 20, 2013 9:59 PM
> Subject: [Talk-us] Trunk vs motorway for rural Interstates with grade
> crossings
>
> As an example of what I am referring to:
>
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/
As an example of what I am referring to:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/145137749/history
I noticed that most of these were recently changed back to motorway. Is
this the consensus of the community at large that these should be
motorway, or should any section with grade crossings be trun
6 matches
Mail list logo
