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 inconsistent with how highways are tagged in
BC and expectations of locals. It would also make BC quite different
than across the boarder in Washington.
I can think of several motorways and trunk roads which are not on the
list in the PDF, and many of the roads on the list are primary, or in at
least one case, secondary. Some of the roads not on the list are more
important in the transportation network than ones on it.
The criteria being proposed are also inherently unverifiable. We map the
world, not what a government database says.
What about new roads? There's a new route that's opened up, and it's a
mix of trunk and motorway, but it's not listed in the NHS report. To tag
it primary when less significant roads constructed to a lower standard
are tagged as trunk and motorway would be absurd.
Because it has a lot of freight, it probably will become a NHS road at
some point. Does its classification magically change when nothing has
changed on the ground?
_______________________________________________
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
