On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 19:02, Martin Koppenhoefer<dieterdre...@gmail.com> wrote: > 2009/8/5 Richard Mann <richard.mann.westoxf...@googlemail.com>: >> I'd agree that it should be "importance" for >> trunk/primary/secondary/tertiary. The stuff about not using trunk for >> single-track roads just doesn't match what people are actually doing >> (judging by some of the roads in the Western Highlands). The physical tends >> to align to the importance, but what we actually tend to tag is the >> importance (usually based on the type of signs). > > Yes, I agree that there is some highway-types that are defined legally > and not according to their importance (motorroad, pedestrian, > living_street, cycleway, bridleway, etc.). > >> However, motorway is physical > > no, I don't agree. A highway becomes motorway when it get's legally > promoted to be a motorway (by the motorway-sign this is indicated).
The USA has no such sign, nor do Canada and Mexico (AFAIK.) Do we have no motorways? -- David J. Lynch djly...@gmail.com _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
