I still lean towards function over design as how to define a trunk road. The present Tag: highway=trunk for high performance roads that don't meet the requirement for motorway actually is inclusive of the function of the highway. All that is required is further the definition to clarify this point.
For a moment I stepped out of OSM's definitions and took at look to Wikipedia which says: *"A trunk road, trunk highway, or strategic road is a major road, usually connecting two or more cities, ports, airports and other places, which is the recommended route for long-distance and freight traffic. Many trunk roads have segregated lanes in a dual carriageway <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dual_carriageway>, or are of motorway standard." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trunk_road <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trunk_road>* I note that this description is more about the purpose of the highway than if it is 2-lanes or 4-lanes, has a dividing barrier, limited access interchanges, etc. While focusing on the design of a highway to determine if it should be a trunk, primary, secondary, tertiary, or residential is far easier to define over the function/purpose of highway it, IMO, misses the point of what a map should be providing. Information to the user as how to travel efficiency from point A to point B. Turning to existing examples of provincial and state maps for guidance I find these examples: - Alberta - http://bit.ly/1ZT3Sz0 - It shows the following three levels. (1) Freeways. (2) Paved provincial highways regardless as to the number of lanes. (3) Gravel surfaced highways. - Saskatchewan - http://bit.ly/1OPB7Ag - (1) Divided highways. (2) Paved provincial highways regardless as to the number of lanes. (3) Thin membrane surfaces - important for heavily load trucks. (4) Gravel surfaces. - Washington state - http://1.usa.gov/1KFy1uI - (1) Interstate. (2) Dual carriageway design state highways. (3) Undivided state highways. (4) County/local roads. When I look at these I find them easy to understand the network between destinations versus having design being the primary focus. Therefore I'd like to suggest the follow definition for Tag: highway=trunk: *high performance roads that don't meet the requirement for motorway design standards and linking two or more cities, ports, airports and other places, which is the recommended route for long-distance and freight traffic.* There can be a further definition for clarity. For example, I would classify Quebec Highway 133 - http://bit.ly/1RNQooL - which links Autoroute 35 to the United States and Interstate 89. However, Quebec Highway 133 does not have any major destination along its route itself. Looking forward to further discussion, Ken On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 8:31 AM, Begin Daniel <jfd...@hotmail.com> wrote: > Well, I am not sure about the conclusion at this point but in order to > move forward, here are some definitions I would propose using *wiki’s > definitions* and current tread discussions: > > > > Tag: highway=motorway to *identify the highest-performance roads within a > territory. Typically, these controlled-access highways have a minimum of > two lanes in each direction that are separated by a barrier*… > > > > Tag: highway=trunk for *high performance roads that don't meet the > requirement for motorway*. In Canada, these roads must have some of the > controlled-access features found on a motorway. > > > > Tag: highway=primary for *major highway linking large towns … The traffic > for both directions is usually not separated by a central barrier*. In > Canada, these roads usually have none of the controlled-access features > found on trunk and motorway. > > > > Most of the confusion comes from the governmental pdf document, cited in > the Canadian tagging guidelines (wiki), which uses definitions that do not > correspond to those of OSM. Once most of us agree on a set of definitions, > starting using the above, we should provide adjusted definitions in the > wiki and remove the pdf document. > > > > Hope it will help > > Daniel > > > > *From:* Chandler Vancouver [mailto:chandler.vancou...@gmail.com] > *Sent:* January-26-16 16:49 > *To:* Stewart Russell > *Cc:* talk-ca > *Subject:* Re: [Talk-ca] Highway recoding > > > > Completely agree, Stewart. > > > > Similarly I live just off a road I would consider to be a tertiary level > road. It runs for only 4 km and links up residential side streets, a high > school, an elementary school and a small scale commercial zone. It is only > two lanes wide but for over 50% of its length has a centre boulevard or a > centre dual left turn lane. As well, less than 25% of its length has > residences that off it and none where you can park on the road itself. > > > > Where it meets four main crossroads the intersections are as follows: > > > > Intersection A: full signal with priority given to the crossroad. > > > > Intersection B: a four-way stop. > > > > Intersection C: full signal with priority given to the road in question. > > > > Intersection D: a stop sign with the crossroad given full priority over > the road in question. > > > > In addition there is a walking trail that crosses with a pedestrian > activated signal but with an advanced warning signal as described at > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Canada:British_Columbia#Highways_and_provincial_roads > under "trunk". > > > > Driving the full length you would know it is a tertiary level route, yet I > can take photographs of the route that could lead you to believe it is a > trunk road. > > > > --- > > > > Another example is SW Marine Drive between Camosun Street and the > University of British Columbia - > https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/255865854#map=15/49.2428/-123.2196 . It > is designed at the level described for trunk road at > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Canada:British_Columbia#Highways_and_provincial_roads, > yet the OSM contributors have designated it as secondary highway. > > > > I don't find this a "maddening" as you say, but then I feel we could > adopt a more UK approach to the definition then a infrastructure/design POV. > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 1:27 PM, Stewart Russell <scr...@gmail.com> wrote: > > A trunk road is not necessarily divided. The limited access part means > that it's not residential. It has to go from a town or city to another town > or city. It predates or has lesser capacity than a motorway. > > It's one of these maddening "know one when I see one" definitions that > makes perfect sense in the UK but is difficult elsewhere. > > Much of the Trans-Canada, f'rinstance, would be considered a trunk road. > > Cheers > Stewart > > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-ca mailing list > Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca > > >
_______________________________________________ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
