The problem is that it ain't that simple. Quite a lot of unclassifieds don't go anywhere much, and aren't really part of the connected network. An unclassified isn't necessarily higher in the hierarchy than a residential.
On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 10:51 PM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer <dieterdre...@gmail.com> wrote: > 2011/7/27 Richard Mann <richard.mann.westoxf...@gmail.com>: >> When I had a go at re-writing it, I tried to give some clarity on the >> boundaries with adjacent values (residential, tertiary, track) - > > > Yes, but on the other hand deleting the cited part changed the > definition and made it more difficult to differentiate between > unclassified and residential. IMHO "lower end of the interconnection > grid network" was very clear, but the current state is a longish and > almost unstructured page of text, even including some country specific > hints, and a very general short description: "Public access road, > non-residential." > > I think that every feature should have a clear "definition" in 1 (max. > 3) sentence(s). All the examples and other particularities can go in > different paragraphs, but should not be required to understand the > point. > > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Unclassified > > cheers, > Martin > > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
