So basically, these super-2 roads should be tagged as motorways instead of primary or trunk? That would be fine with me. Even though I have changed roads like these back to primary when someone had changed them to motorway, I only did that because I thought motorway was not supposed to be used there. But if motorway is to be used, that's okay with me.
-Compdude On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 8:49 PM, Chris Lawrence <lordsu...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 2:36 PM, Paul Johnson <ba...@ursamundi.org> wrote: > > That would mean most freeways including interstates in the west, with the > > exception of limited sections in the bay area, southwestern California, > > central Portland and urban Seattle wouldn't be motorways, as restricting > > pedestrians and bicycles is unusual in 34 states. > > To clarify, I meant that most states have some practice that involves > specially marking freeways; for example, California uses the "Freeway > Entrance" sign, as I believe is also the case in Nevada, Washington, > and a few other states, while in many other states the restrictions > are spelled out on a sign at the beginning of controlled access and > on-ramps. Of course, there are states that don't post these > restriction signs (like Mississippi), and there are states that allow > certain categories of vehicle on some or all freeways that are > forbidden on other states' freeways. But as a guide for figuring out > if a stretch of road is a freeway (and thus in OSM tagging a > highway=motorway) knowing field signing practices for freeways is a > helpful indicator, along with the legal designation of the route (if > the state makes a legal distinction between partial and full control > of access, regardless of the terminology). > > And this isn't tagging for the renderer. It's tagging based on the > western hemisphere translation of the concept of a "motorway," which > includes the possibility of undivided routes with full access control. > Tagging for the renderer would be tagging undivided freeways as > trunks because we want them to be visually distinct from divided > freeways tagged as motorways in Mapnik's default style. > > TLDR version: if there are signs at each end saying the road is a > freeway, and we have it tagged as a primary rather than a motorway > (the super two freeway section of US 101 in Washington State is > apparently an example, based on what He Who Shall Not Be Named says in > another forum), that's a problem. We can haggle over more ambiguous > cases like (presumably) MD 60 - I've never driven it and haven't done > any research with the state authorities, so I have no particular > expertise there. > > > Chris > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-us mailing list > Talk-us@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us >
_______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
