On Sat, Apr 19, 2008 at 1:15 AM, Peter Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Major non-interstate highways that have traffic light free multi-level > junctions etc should be tagged as 'trunk' and possibly also be rendered > orange but with less grand route numbers to differentiate them from > interstate routes. > This statement really bothers me. First, we must make every effort to keep the data separate from the rendering. Consider a section of Interstate Highway that structurally resembles a UK motorway. This section of road may also be part of a state highway. It's not uncommon for a section of road to have both a state highway sign and an Interstate sign. In some very barren areas an Interstate may have standard intersections without ramps. As in your example above a road that is not an Interstate may have multiple levels and ramps. Whatever scheme we agree on must keep the road's structure separate from legal classifications. I checked and the wiki still says that the highway tag should be used to indicate what the road looks like. My reasoning can be found on the talk page. Whether a road is an Interstate, state highway, county road, etc. should be indicated in another data field. I haven't been following all the conversations lately, but I remember an Australian was tagging a gravel road as a motorway because it was the main road between two rural cities and he wanted it prominently rendered. Perhaps in this case some kind of importance tag should be used. I think free tagging is great, but we should not allow multiple definitions for each tag. A tag should not indicate both it's legal status and it's structure, although one might imply the other under certain circumstances. -- http://bowlad.com
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
