On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 8:27 AM, Greg Troxel <g...@ir.bbn.com> wrote:
> > Bradley White <theangrytom...@gmail.com> writes: > > > In urban areas, I would consider secondary to usually mean 4 lanes, 35 > > mph(ish), maybe divided maybe not, with not much in the way of access > > control. Primaries are faster, more controlled and usually wider - more > > important roads in the area than secondary. Under the scheme that this > > contributor recently tagged the city with, there is no distinction > between > > these roads. > > This is messy. As I have read the norms, primary is for US highwways, > and secondary for state highways. Then, classifications are adjusted > based on importance, so that a state highway that is as important as a > US highway (e.g MA 2 in massachusetts, which is as big a deal as US 20, > if not more so, is tagged as primary). > True, but on the other hand, an eight lane city boulevard's probably going to be considered a more major route than a two lane county road intersecting it (or even parallel a few blocks over), even though the network hierarchy would consider the county road more major. > Just because a road has 4 lanes doesn't make it like a US highway. > Right, that's what the network tag on the route relation that the way should already be a part of means. (Have I mentioned yet, it's time to kill ref=* on ways and go exclusively to relations for this information?) > The root of the problem is that the view of what's important in the city > is different than outside, and these have to sort of meet up. Outside > of cities, important roads take you from one place to another place, not > across town. > In more rural areas, these do more or less line up. Major cities tend to be their own beast when it comes to this sort of thing.
_______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us