On Wed, 2014-08-13 at 07:37 +0100, Lester Caine wrote: > On 13/08/14 01:22, Robert Norris wrote: > > However I am in favour of this edit, but I think the edit needs to *only* > > change 'C' Roads, as some B roads are tagged tertiary. > Ditto. > But it's a bit like the 'name' problem where a few roads have locally > known names, but these are not displayed on signs :( Need recording but > not necessarily displaying. I think thats an important point, there are many such roads in Shropshire too. There needs to be a way of navigating to an address on these roads, but we do need a method of indicating to the end user that there is no sign, partly to tell routers to not say turn left into x road, but also to give confidence to someone that they really are in the right place when they haven't seen a sign.
name:unmarked maybe an option. > > On a slightly different tack, the tertiary road designation is more of a > problem. While not advocating 'tag for routing', this is one that is > making my own use of OSMAND almost impossible, and I can't believe > others don't find the problem. It refuses to use the B4632 ( used to be > the A46! ) going north from here, and I can't trace why. Roads south are > a similar problem, but these a good quality 'C' roads. Should they be > 'upgraded' to secondary or should the distinction be removed in OSMAND > for UK roads? If I can't trust local routing why should I at a new > destination and we are talking a several mile detour here which can add > 30mins to the journey. > I do think this is a router problem, they really do overuse the highway type tag. Often I have found routing problems can be fixed by simply mapping the speed limits. Not tagging for the renderer/router, but ensuring it has more malformation to work to. The current fad of reducing speed limits on primary A roads will make this even more important. Phil (trigpoint) _______________________________________________ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb