On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 8:30 PM, James Ewen <ve6...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 10:43 AM, Tim Francois <sk1pp...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > >> I'm currently working on the Dempster highway with a tracklog I created >> in the summer, hoping to extend it further north into NWT. The road >> connecting to the Dempster in the south is the Klondike Highway. >> However, this paved 'highway' is tagged as a secondary road, whilst the >> unpaved Dempster is tagged as a primary road. >> >> I think the Klondike Highway, and other similar roads in this part of >> Canada, should be tagged as primary roads. What do others think? > > This is a problem with the way that highways are tagged in my opinion.
Of course. > The OSM features page sometimes uses physical attributes to describe > the roadways. Sure. Some tags are better than others when measured on the scales of observability, verifiability, importance and permanence. > The roadway needs to be tagged for the usage it is designed for. Agreed. This case certainly suggests promoting the road a level or two. Sparsity of any roads, official designation, linking distant communities each suggest promotion. Promoting a highway is risky when unaware of the surrounding context, but when there is nothing else for dozens or hundreds of km.... Go ahead. > One has to think about how the final map is going to be displayed. Now that is a little close to tagging for the renderer. > If it were up to me, classification would denote the importance of the > road in the road network, and surface, number of lanes, and other tags > would describe the physical attributes of the roadway. That's the way it is. There was discussion today on #osm about primary road in Scotland; gravel, one shared land for both directions, periodic pullouts for passing. > My two bits, and then some! Fair enough. _______________________________________________ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
