My two cents. I think what James said is the same everywhere. The name field on the way usually carry the local name, the one given by the local authorities (town, province). If you Google Streetview local signs, that is the name you usually see in the area. However the relation “attaching” all the pieces of road should be called “Trans-Canada Highway” and you can standardise that one. With regards to the type of road, should reflect the physical and use characteristics of the stretch of road. Motorway is ONLY for a proper motorway with no intersection, stop, light, etc. A lot if not most of the Trans-Canada is not made of motorways. Trunk is a good choice is this road is a really major road for the area. Primary might still make sense … must consider locally.
Works of caution with Trunk, it leaves the bicycle access field unspecified and that screws-up some routing engines, so if you change a primary/secondary to Trunk PLEASE explicitly set the bicycle=yes tag (unless it is explicitly not allowed). Since by default it is “unspecified” I have seen many routing engines erring on the side of cautiousness and assume it is NO. Most of the time it is actually YES. In Quebec a large portion of the 117 up north is actually part of the Route Verte and as such bicycle=designated is even used although the way is a trunk road. Cyclist can safely use the wide shoulders in those areas (most of the time…). I think the ref field on the way must reflect the local numbering ile. 117, 417, etc. If the Trans-Canada highway has another numbering on top of that then put that one in the relation, not the way. This may be confusing when compared to the US interstate system which is more standardized I think. Here in Canada the Trans-Canada get some federal funding but the roads remain administered locally for the most part. The OSM relation is really the place to tag all related to the Trans-Canada Highway proper, and the way remains the properties of the local authorities… hope that makes any sense. Cheers. > On Mar 26, 2018, at 07:33, James <james2...@gmail.com> wrote: > > highway 417 should be tagged as highway 417 and not principally transcanada > way as this is how it's known locally. It can be tagged in transcanada > relation, but it's mainly known as the 417 > > On Mon, Mar 26, 2018, 7:22 AM Olivia Robu - (p), <olivia.r...@telenav.com > <mailto:olivia.r...@telenav.com>> wrote: > Hello, > > The Telenav Map team has done some research on the status of the ways and > relations of Trans-Canada Highway. > > Here are some conclusions from this research: > > The highway is formed from 30 routes; > Every route has different names for the name tag, such as: street names, > other routes names or Trans-Canada highway name in different forms; > The issue above is repeating for the ref tag; > The name of Trans-Canada highway has more than one form (Trans-Canada > Highway, TransCanada Highway, Trans Canada Highway, etc); > Another issue is the variety of names in other tags related to it (such as: > name:en, name:fr, alt_name, alt_name:en, alt_name:fr, nat_name); > There are some routes that don’t have a route name only ref (5 routes); > There are some routes that overlap: > in Manitoba: - PTH 1 (MB Trans-Canada Highway) and Trans-Canada Highway > (Super); > - Yellowhead Highway and > PTH 16 (MB Trans-Canada Highway); > > in Alberta: Trans-Canada Highway (AB) and Trans-Canada Highway (Super); > in British Columbia: - Trans-Canada Highway (BC, Super) and Trans-Canada > Highway; > About 90% of these routes are broken; > About 80% of these routes have highway value flip flop (motorway, trunk, > primary); > > > We propose to make some improvements to standardize all the routes. We would > like to get your thoughts and feedback on the following questions: > > What is the correct form for the name that appears in the way name tag? For > example: “Highway 417” is part of Trans-Canada Highway and has the name value > tag “Highway 417”. To resolve this issue, we would need to standardize the > ways’ name tag for all the provinces. The question is, should we modify the > way names in to “Trans-Canada Highway”, or should we insert the name > “Trans-Canada Highway” at the end of the name, like this: “Highway 417 > (Trans-Canada Highway)”, or should we leave it like it is? > Another issue is related to the official name of the highway. According to > our research the official name for Trans-Canada Highway is “Trans-Canada > Highway”. In our research we have found several forms of this name: > TransCanada Highway, Trans Canada Highway, etc. Should we change all the > names to “Trans-Canada Highway”? > Another question is related to the priority of the names in the name value > tag and also for the ref tag. If we have a way that has a street name (“Old > Highway 16” or “North York River Road”) and two routes that overlap (ex: > Trans-Canada Highway and Highway 11). What is the name and the ref that > should appear in the way name tag and ref tag? > In case of overlapping identical routes (ex: in Manitoba there is two routes > for Trans-Canada Highway). What should be the best approach? > In case of highway value flip flop (motorway, trunk, primary), there are > several segments like this outside the cities (ex.: Route “Ontario Highway 17 > (Blind River to North Bay) (ID 3739829)”, or Route “Trans Canada Highway 104” > (ID 1732797)). For areas outside the cities we propose to change the highway > value into motorway/trunk. What do you think about this issue? > > > We think that one approach to resolve the first problem could be to add > “Trans-Canada Highway” or “Highway 417 (Trans-Canada Highway)” to the way > name for all the routes, and the ref number correspondent to each route that > forms the Trans-Canada Highway. > > > > We look forward to hearing your feedback and hope to improve the situation > together. > > > > Here is the link to github ticket that we created: > https://github.com/TelenavMapping/mapping-projects/issues/57 > <https://github.com/TelenavMapping/mapping-projects/issues/57> > > > Regards, > > Olivia Robu > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-ca mailing list > Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org <mailto:Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca > <https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca> > _______________________________________________ > 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
