I think primary ought to be used for major state routes and minor US routes, secondary for minor state routes, and tertiary for collector arterials.
On Oct 14, 2017 9:23 PM, "Nathan Mills" <nat...@nwacg.net> wrote: > I guess my question is why primary isn't good enough for the primary route > between places that don't have higher grade roads connecting them? These > important mostly two lane roads are perfectly fine as primary. > > In many cases primary routes happen to be divided, but in many cases they > aren't. Having a simple distinction between the two by using trunk to mean > non-motorway divided (or similar) preserves long-standing practice and > generally seems like a good thing to me. > > -Nathan > > On October 14, 2017 11:18:43 PM EDT, Evin Fairchild <evindf...@gmail.com> > wrote: >> >> I'm amazed that NE2's definition hasn't been removed after 7 years. It >> must not have been that controversial or else someone would have removed >> it. Seems like you just don't agree with his opinion and just really have >> some personal problems with that guy. I know he engaged in some really dumb >> stuff like unilaterally changing all the US highways to trunk and he >> ultimately got banned for a turn restriction dispute with you over a parclo >> interchange in Florida, but he's not the only one who believes that many US >> highways are deserving of trunk status given the amount of traffic they >> receive and their importance in a region's highway network. >> >> On Sat, Oct 14, 2017 at 8:02 PM, Paul Johnson <ba...@ursamundi.org> >> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On Sat, Oct 14, 2017 at 9:43 PM, Evin Fairchild <evindf...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Oct 14, 2017 5:41 PM, "Paul Johnson" <ba...@ursamundi.org> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Sat, Oct 14, 2017 at 7:28 PM, Evin Fairchild <evindf...@gmail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Oct 14, 2017 4:25 PM, "Paul Johnson" <ba...@ursamundi.org> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Sat, Oct 14, 2017 at 6:08 PM, Evin Fairchild <evindf...@gmail.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On Oct 14, 2017 2:04 PM, "Wolfgang Zenker" <wolfg...@lyxys.ka.sub.org> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Hi, >>>>>> >>>>>> it looks to me that this discussion is going in circles, not forward >>>>>> at the moment. IMHO it does not make a lot of sense to argue what >>>>>> might >>>>>> be the true meaning of "trunk". Instead, we should concentrate on what >>>>>> it should mean, document this meaning if we can agree on one and don't >>>>>> worry to much about what other maps or different parts of the world >>>>>> think a "trunk" is. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Yeah, the whole reason why this discussion hasn't resulted in a >>>>>> consensus for 7+ years is because people have dug in their heels so much >>>>>> and said "trunk roads can only be divided highways, no its, ands, or >>>>>> buts." >>>>>> I support what is written on the wiki that says that it is the second >>>>>> most >>>>>> important road after motorway. I haven't seen a single compelling reason >>>>>> to >>>>>> believe that trunk should only apply to divided highways. You can still >>>>>> tell whether a trunk is divided at low zooms based on how thick the line >>>>>> is. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I'm OK with single carriageway trunks, if they're controlled access, >>>>> like, say, the Chickasaw Turnpike, and similarly constructed roads. The >>>>> single carriageway parts of US 395 or US 97 in eastern Oregon, US 400 in >>>>> Kansas or US 75 in Oklahoma, though? They're all solid primaries. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> You actually think that US 97, the main artery thru Central Oregon >>>>> that passes thru the Bend area which has a 75K population and a metro >>>>> population of 100K shouldn't be connected to the outside world with a >>>>> trunk >>>>> road? >>>>> >>>> >>>> Yes. Because for the majority of that length that isn't between US 20 >>>> and County Road 40 is, for all practical purposes, the same generic two >>>> lane, shoulderless ribbon of pavement that pretty much any two lane Texas >>>> FM or RM road, or pretty much any other similar road in the American west. >>>> Primary is more than ample for such a road. >>>> >>>> >>>> That's not accurate to compare a US highway to some podunk FM/RM road >>>> out in the middle of nowhere in Texas. US 97 has way more traffic and very >>>> deserving of its trunk road designation. Most US highways are, except in >>>> places where they parallel an interstate or other freeway. BTW, this is >>>> what is written on the wiki. >>>> >>> >>> Which was updated by NE2 to skew towards his view of the situation. >>> Any edits by him have negative value at this point. Disconnect his reality >>> from actual reality. >>> >> >> > -- > Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. >
_______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us