The first one is motorway_link, the second primary (because it's two-way), the third primary_link, the fourth could be just about anything from trunk to service. Mapnik makes a mess if a link intersects a service, but that's cos Mapnik renders a trunk_link under a service, which is wrong. The simplest is probably to call the fourth a trunk with a note that there's a case for it being a trunk_link, but that trunk is more renderer-proof.
Richard On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 3:37 AM, Nathan Edgars II <nerou...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 2:56 PM, Nathan Edgars II <nerou...@gmail.com> wrote: >> So it looks like the general consensus is that a link should only >> intersect other links except at the ends? >> > Clarification: I mean that each "independent section" of the link or > connecting string of links should intersect no non-links (including > unmapped driveways) along the way. In other words, > http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/5696070 is fine, since it's > really two links, one from I-87 to 230th and one from 230th to I-87. > On the other hand, http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/52557869 > and http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/52557872, among other > links south of Elizabeth and West Lawn, should be at most > primary_link, since the "independent sections" from NJ 4 can only make > it that far before hitting residential streets. > > But what about http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/11660654, a > typical U-turn jughandle that has two (mapped) driveway intersections? > Do the driveways really prevent it from being a link the whole way? > > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
