On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 12:37 AM, Nathan Mills <nat...@nwacg.net> wrote: > On Sun, 29 May 2011 00:13:33 -0400, Anthony wrote: >> If you want to get people to tag "more than two lanes" and "a >> barely-existent shoulder", I think you'd have much more success >> creating tags for those features than convincing people that their >> area of the country isn't allowed to have any trunks. > > That's quite the misrepresentation of what I'm saying.
It was an exact quote. > Again, my point is > that trunk is much more useful (especially to people using rendered mapnik > tiles) if it is mainly restricted to four lane divided sorts of roads here > in the US. And my point is 1) that you aren't going to convince people to do that; and 2) that if you could convince people to tag the number of lanes, you'd be better off having them use a tag which says the number of lanes. On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 12:37 AM, Nathan Mills <nat...@nwacg.net> wrote: > US-441 between St. Cloud and Yeehaw Junction could easily be trunk by NE2's > definition (and apparently yours, although you haven't really indicated how > exactly it should be used) I indicated how trunk should be used in my first post to this thread. When you've got a non-motorway, and you want mapnik to color the road green, and show it at z5, you use trunk. _______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
