On Thu, Dec 19, 2019 at 1:19 PM Martijn van Exel <m...@rtijn.org> wrote:
> I actually like your suggestion that highway=trunk does not add much value > to the U.S. map, Eric. > We love to add detail / granularity to OSM so much, it can become hard to > envisage taking some away. > Not saying we should abolish trunk right here and now, but something I'd > consider as one outcome. > I'd like to see a lot more left up to the data consumer and more regional values to be widely acceptable. For example, instead of trying to smash the entire planet into the UK's prescribed values and trying to come up with equivalences, use the terminology each country uses. So, for example, in the US, instead of motorway, trunk, primary, secondary, tertiary, perhaps something more like freeway, expressway, major/minor_principal (just having this would fix a *lot* of problems with Texas and Missouri and their extensive secondary systems), major/minor_collector...the US just has a way more complex view of how highways work. Or at least some more serious consideration given to the proposal at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:UltimateRiff/HFCS (but perhaps with "other principal arterials" as primary and a new "highway=quartinary". Much like moving route refs to highway relations (freeing the ref=* tag on highways for situations where the road and the route have different refs), leaving the mental gymnastics up to an algorithm and leaving less confusion to the mapper is getting to be long overdue.
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
