Kristian Zoerhoff <kristian.zoerh...@gmail.com> writes: > On Mon, May 30, 2011 at 10:41 PM, Toby Murray <toby.mur...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 4:05 PM, Nathan Mills <nat...@nwacg.net> wrote: >>> On Sun, 29 May 2011 12:09:30 -0700, Paul Johnson wrote: >>> >>>> I'm thinking the differences between motorways and trunks are minor. >>>> Trunks may have intersections, motorways don't. >>> >>> That's the simple way to state my opinion. It also seemed to be the thrust >>> of most of the discussion on the talk page of the wiki page referenced >>> previously as closest to consensus (the page itself just references the >>> existence of the two camps and leaves it at that). >>> >>> In short, my position is simply that an end user expects a trunk road to be >>> identifiably different than primary or secondary. That's how it's done on >>> other maps, so I don't see why that's such a bad thing here. >> >> I agree with this as well. And I too thought this was a pretty widely >> accepted convention. > > That's one accepted convention, to be sure, but it sometimes ignores > the realities of where traffic goes. > > To give an example: <http://osm.org/go/ZUdwt69> > > IL 72 (the secondary at the top of the map) is a 4- to 6-lane at-grade > expressway; wide median, lights only every mile or so, speed limit up > to 55 mph. It carries a fair amount of traffic, but because it > parallels I 90 (a toll road here), it really only peaks at rush hour, > when the toll road is near capacity.. > > US 20 (the trunk at the map bottom), is a 4-lane, non-divided road, > but it carries far more traffic than 72, as it connects the two > motorways at the map ends (the Elgin-O'Hare Expressway, and the Elgin > Bypass, which were never connected). It's not particularly > distinguishable from a lesser 4-lane road, aside from the absurd > amount of traffic it carries. If we stuck purely to the above > convention, 72 would be trunk, and 20 would be primary (at best). But
But what's wrong with that? It sounds like IL 72 is a higher-class road in terms of the physical road, and US 20 doesn't seem to have almost-motorway features. Just because a road that is properly labeled primary is heavily used doesn't make it a higher class; you certainly wouldn't label it a motorway based on traffic count. > traffic flow cares more about where the road goes, not what it looks > like. Sure, and routers can use that. Probably we need to completely decouple nominal importance in the hierarchy of road types physical characteristics importance to the people who use it
pgpWidit3jDAk.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
