On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 8:00 AM, Nathan Edgars II <nerou...@gmail.com>wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 8:24 AM, McGuire, Matthew > <matt.mcgu...@metc.state.mn.us> wrote: > > This looks like coding for the map rather than mapping what’s on the > ground. > > I understand that a highway’s importance to an area is relative to other > > highways in the area. But that doesn’t mean a two lane at-grade highway > > should be coded the same in one area as a four lane limited access > highway > > in another. Or perhaps there should be another tag for the type of road > as > > experienced on the ground vs a state or national scale map. > > We have those tags: lanes=*, width=*, etc. But there's no "on the > ground" definition of importance, Yes there is. It's the highway= tag. > and there's nothing wrong with > tagging correctly for the renderers. Yes there is. "Tagging for the renderers" is the first thing people in OSM will tell you *not* to do. > Classification has been > subjective from the beginning in the US, because there is no > consistent government-assigned classification. > That is incorrect. There is a relatively consistent government-assigned classification system. It has been linked to several times on this list (most recently by the originator of this thread). The problem is that the European community has decided that the highway tags are shorthand for physical qualities that usually only exist in Europe. The suggestion I made in my first reply to this thread was that we use a separate tag to describe what the US government calls the way. This would allow us to make an interstate-only road map like the one that Google shows you or that you can obtain in paper from your state government.
_______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
