athan Mills <nat...@nwacg.net> wrote:
> On Fri, 27 May 2011 12:17:53 -0400, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > >>> The 'major intercity' road ought to be tagged as primary unless >>> there's >>> a specific reason to upgrade, IMO. That leaves the data more useful >>> to >>> end users. >> >> Actually that leaves it less useful for users in cities, as then >> there are only two classifications for non-intercity highways, >> secondary and tertiary. > > Uh, what are you on about? Motorway itself doesn't necessarily imply >intercity or intracity, and neither do any of the other >classifications. >I can think of several intercity county roads that ought not qualify >for >anything beyond unclassified (they're old routes with several bypasses) > >and several intracity routes that definitely ought to be classified as > trunk or motorway. It comes down to how the highway is built and what > the highway is. > >>> Also, I don't know how major a road between Dumas, TX and Texline, >>> TX >>> really is. If it weren't a US highway, I'd probably demote it all >>> the >>> way to secondary. >> >> It's on the National Highway System, meaning the FHWA considers it to >> be a major road. It's probably the best route between Kansas City and >> Albuquerque. > > I'm going to assume you mean 'best non-Interstate route'. Most of it > isn't even four laned yet, although Texas has some of it under > construction. Same goes for the segment between Clayton, NM and I-25, >although there New Mexico is upgrading the road to four lane divided in > > one whack. Which, as an aside, makes for one incredibly long > construction zone. > > Talking solely about relatively rural areas, it seems to me that by > default the best non-motorway route between two regionally important >cities should be tagged primary unless there's a reason to upgrade it >to > trunk based on the physical characteristics of the road. To me, trunk >implies a divided 4 lane at worst, or arguably including a true super >2, > of which I've seen a couple in Kansas (I think one of Oklahoma's > turnpikes might also be a true super 2, but I haven't driven it > personally). It just makes sense to me based on the way we build our > roads here in the US. I have driven on quite a few highways here in the USA that vary, mile by mile, in the number of lanes, how well they are graded, whether or not driveways connect directly to the highway, etc. This usually reflects their having been upgraded one piece at a time. Sections that pass through difficult terrain are often the last to be upgraded. Of course, whether or not a local politician has friends or relatives in the road-construction business makes a difference as well. If you classify these highways according to their importance to the transportation grid, then long sections, with variable physical characteristics, will be classified the same. -- John F. Eldredge -- j...@jfeldredge.com "Reserve your right to think, for even to think wrongly is better than not to think at all." -- Hypatia of Alexandria _______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
