A possible revised assignment taking the medians of different opinions case by case:
South Pole Traverse: secondary (or maybe primary) The other 4 traverses: tertiary Ground routes between major stations, airports and harbours: tertiary Main ways within stations: unclassified At McMurdo, Main Street, The Gap, Williams Field Road and Phoenix Road would become tertiary, and all other current tertiaries would be demoted to unclassified. Are there any objections to this change? This will affect 130 ways. I forgot to mention that the Route du Raid was highway=secondary from 2018 to 2023 [1] and that the South Pole Traverse was highway=unclassified from 2012 to 2020 and highway=primary since then, with three different mappers trying to change it to highway=trunk. [2] For two years, Route du Raid was mapped as more important than the South Pole Traverse. [1] https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/187792382/history [2] https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/124904767/history On Wed, 24 Apr 2024 at 11:27, Fernando Trebien <fernando.treb...@gmail.com> wrote: > > As Antarctica is international space,[1] I understand that, in > principle, the highway classification scheme of no particular country > applies there. For a while, I tried to come up with a balanced generic > scheme based on the regional importance of these roads,[2] which has > been questioned,[3] so I would like to hear opinions on the matter. > > Should the classification of highways in Antarctica: > > 1. Follow country-specific conventions near stations? This can lead to > different classifications for long polar traverses maintained by > different countries and can create disconnected road networks (in > terms of classification) between nearby stations operated by different > countries. > > 2. Follow generic OSM definitions based on absolute population > thresholds of the places they connect? (10k+ people for town, 1k for > village, 100 for hamlet, etc.) This will assign very low road classes > across the continent. > > 3. Follow generic OSM definitions based on lower place population > thresholds that are more compatible with the reality of the continent, > based on regional importance? [4] The result may be perceived by some > as assigning higher than normal highway classes to the connections > between these small settlements. > > Additionally, should the permanent population be considered (zero in > most cases, which is the case even for larger stations, further > lowering highway classification), or the average occupancy of the > stations? > > Regards, > > [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antarctic_Treaty_System > [2] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Antarctica/Tagging#Roads_and_routes > [3] https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/150316868 > [4] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:highway#Assumptions > > -- > Fernando Trebien -- Fernando Trebien _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
