Re: [Talk-us] US highway classification
On 5/27/2011 12:32 AM, Nathan Mills wrote: Would I be correct in stating that tagging an undivided 2 lane (one lane in each direction) highways would be improper, even if a state calls the highway a trunk for planning purposes? I agree for this case, there is no established convention that can consider this a trunk. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] US highway classification
On 5/27/2011 12:32 AM, Nathan Mills wrote: Would I be correct in stating that tagging an undivided 2 lane (one lane in each direction) highways would be improper, even if a state calls the highway a trunk for planning purposes? Especially if it's in the middle of a town with a low speed limit. I understood trunk to be divided and limited access (but not fully grade-separated). No, trunk is also used for a major intercity highway that's not a freeway. Take a look at the UK and their network of trunks. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] US highway classification
On 5/27/2011 9:34 AM, Richard Welty wrote: On 5/27/11 9:26 AM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: On 5/27/2011 12:32 AM, Nathan Mills wrote: Would I be correct in stating that tagging an undivided 2 lane (one lane in each direction) highways would be improper, even if a state calls the highway a trunk for planning purposes? Especially if it's in the middle of a town with a low speed limit. I understood trunk to be divided and limited access (but not fully grade-separated). No, trunk is also used for a major intercity highway that's not a freeway. Take a look at the UK and their network of trunks. and we have no functioning definition of what constitutes a major intercity highway in the US. There's no functioning definition of any of the classifications below motorway. which is to day, i don't agree with many of your upgrades, but i've chosen not to engage in an edit war in the map nor have i chosen to engage in flame wars on this list about it, but there is no consensus on what constitutes a trunk in the US, and i believe your position is an outlier. I've tagged based on what practices I've seen applied to the map. For example, when I joined, several two-lane highways across Nevada were trunk. New Jersey has had a number of two-lane trunks for years. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Ideas for OSMF US Swag
On 5/26/2011 5:09 PM, Thea Aldrich wrote: Our question to the community is: If you like this idea, what types of branded materials would you like? Just to toss out some ideas: A refrigerator magnet in the shape of a US map. A Map Cap ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Ideas for OSMF US Swag
Thea Aldrich wrote: Our question to the community is: If you like this idea, what types of branded materials would you like? I think it is a great idea and is the sort of thing a local chapter can be useful for to support the community and help spread the word. One thing that would imho be useful is to create flyers [1] to hand out to people who haven't heard about OSM to explain what OSM is about and why people should care to contribute. From what I have gathered, the German flyer [2] has been quite a success with apparently 40.000 flyers printed and distributed to date. There is now also an English flyer which the UK chapter distributes for free [3], but it only extends its offer to UK. So perhaps OSMF-US could print and distribute a similar flyer in the US, although it might be good to adapt it to fit the needs of the US better first. Kai [1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Flyers_and_posters [2] http://www.openstreetmap.de/aktionen.html [3] http://shop.opencyclemap.org/products/openstreetmap-promotional-leaflets -- View this message in context: http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/Ideas-for-OSMF-US-Swag-tp6408754p6411371.html Sent from the USA mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] US highway classification
On 05/27/2011 09:06 AM, Richard Welty wrote: if you peruse the wiki, and make a reasonably through search for definitions of trunk in the US, you will find an extensive complex of contradictions and inconsistencies. Maybe someone should find all these and bring it up on the list so that a definition can be determined and the inconsistencies can be fixed? Just saying “the definition is inconsistent so I’ll just use my own interpretation” isn’t very constructive. —Alex Mauer “hawke” ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] US highway classification
On 5/27/11 12:00 PM, Alex Mauer wrote: On 05/27/2011 09:06 AM, Richard Welty wrote: if you peruse the wiki, and make a reasonably through search for definitions of trunk in the US, you will find an extensive complex of contradictions and inconsistencies. Maybe someone should find all these and bring it up on the list so that a definition can be determined and the inconsistencies can be fixed? Just saying “the definition is inconsistent so I’ll just use my own interpretation” isn’t very constructive. as it happens, i did this a while back. there may have been edits since i collected this stuff, but i included the URLs where the text came from for a reason. Definitions found in the Wiki: Generic definition from http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Map_Features#Highway Important roads that aren't motorways. Typically maintained by central, not local government. Need not necessarily be a divided highway. In the UK, all green signed A roads are, in OSM, classed as 'trunk'. From http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Trunk#International_equivalence Divided highway without ramps. Higher speeds (65+mph). This includes some US highways and some state highways. From http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_States_roads_tagging#Trunk_tag (Interstate Highway section of page) Trunk tag NOTE: The definition below is not commonly used; see the talk page. Many people use trunk to mean expressway-grade arterials with at-grade intersections, major non-motorway intercity highways, or both. Most controlled-access highways without adequate speed or travel lanes or with obstructions should be designated highway=trunk. This designation applies, for example, to the two-lane Interstate 93 in northern New Hampshire. highway=trunk should apply to any segment, travel on which typically implies or necessitates clearing the obstruction. Any ramps onto or from a trunk highway get highway=trunk_link, even if they otherwise qualify for highway=motorway_link. Ramps leading into or from weigh stations, inspection booths, welcome centers, rest areas, and similar diversions accessible only from a trunk or motorway highway also carry highway=trunk_link. Trunk highways include controlled-access highways that lie within military bases; contain draw bridges, toll booths, or other obstructions; have a speed limit less than 50 miles per hour; or have only one lane in each direction, whether divided or otherwise (sometimes called a super-two freeway). The designations highway=trunk and highway=trunk_link apply to all toll roads. From http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_States_roads_tagging#Motorway_and_Trunk_tags (United States Highway section of page) Motorway and Trunk tags If any segment of a U.S. highway or any other road merits highway=motorway or highway=trunk according to the criteria heretofore described, it should be so designated. From the talk side of US tagging (note that there is extensive discussion which i have not copied into this document) http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:United_States_roads_tagging#Trunk Trunk Unless part of the Interstate system * An Arterial Divided highway that is partially but not entirely grade separated. From http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Roads#USA US Highways should be tagged with highway=primary. State Highways and County Highways should be tagged with highway=secondary. Any of these which is a divided highway with high speeds (65mph+) and intersections with other roads, and legal for bicycles and motorbikes to use, should be tagged with highway=trunk. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Ideas for OSMF US Swag
On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 11:00 AM, Kai Krueger kakrue...@gmail.com wrote: Thea Aldrich wrote: Our question to the community is: If you like this idea, what types of branded materials would you like? I think it is a great idea and is the sort of thing a local chapter can be useful for to support the community and help spread the word. One thing that would imho be useful is to create flyers [1] to hand out to people who haven't heard about OSM to explain what OSM is about and why people should care to contribute. From what I have gathered, the German flyer [2] has been quite a success with apparently 40.000 flyers printed and distributed to date. There is now also an English flyer which the UK chapter distributes for free [3], but it only extends its offer to UK. So perhaps OSMF-US could print and distribute a similar flyer in the US, although it might be good to adapt it to fit the needs of the US better first. There is at least one English language flyer around. If I recall the biggest hold up is that nobody volunteered to do the actual mailings from a US address. Is somebody willing to do that? ideally, the volunteer would send out flyers each week in response to the requests. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] US highway classification
On 5/27/2011 10:04 AM, Nathan Mills wrote: On Fri, 27 May 2011 09:26:41 -0400, Nathan Edgars II wrote: No, trunk is also used for a major intercity highway that's not a freeway. Take a look at the UK and their network of trunks. I'm sorry, I thought I posted to talk-us. My mistake. ;) Seems to me that trunk has no meaning if it is used in that way. In the UK, roads are classified based on the national government's classification of the roads (hence the confusing-to-us 'unclassified' tag. Since we don't have a single overarching national road network like that, I don't think that's a relevant model to use here. How would you apply this argument to the use of primary to tertiary in the US? Generally speaking, I think any divided and controlled access highway probably ought to be tagged as a motorway barring specific local circumstances that cause it to deserve a demotion and any divided, but merely limited access and not fully controlled access, highway probably ought to be tagged as trunk barring specific local circumstances. The 'major intercity' road ought to be tagged as primary unless there's a specific reason to upgrade, IMO. That leaves the data more useful to end users. Actually that leaves it less useful for users in cities, as then there are only two classifications for non-intercity highways, secondary and tertiary. Also, I don't know how major a road between Dumas, TX and Texline, TX really is. If it weren't a US highway, I'd probably demote it all the way to secondary. It's on the National Highway System, meaning the FHWA considers it to be a major road. It's probably the best route between Kansas City and Albuquerque. Also note the proposed translation on http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Highway_Functional_Classification_System , used by at least one mapper in Kansas. Principal arterials range from expressways to major two-lane intercity highways. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] US highway classification
On 5/27/2011 12:00 PM, Alex Mauer wrote: On 05/27/2011 09:06 AM, Richard Welty wrote: if you peruse the wiki, and make a reasonably through search for definitions of trunk in the US, you will find an extensive complex of contradictions and inconsistencies. Maybe someone should find all these and bring it up on the list so that a definition can be determined and the inconsistencies can be fixed? I have tried in the past. The problem is that nobody can agree on which definition to use (even in the trunks must have four lanes camp, there's the Texas style, where everything with four lanes and a median is trunk, and the expressway style, where only limited-access surface expressways are trunk). Hell, even motorway is controversial (Seattle's Alaskan Way Viaduct is marked as trunk when it should be motorway). I'm all for consistency, even if it's not the way I currently tag. But this doesn't seem to be an attainable goal. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Ideas for OSMF US Swag
Richard is right, there is an English language flyer. I believe Frederik Ramm has it. If someone can volunteer to mail it that would be great. I'm home less than 50% of the year so I don't think I'm the right person. -Kate On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 12:09 PM, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote: On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 11:00 AM, Kai Krueger kakrue...@gmail.com wrote: Thea Aldrich wrote: Our question to the community is: If you like this idea, what types of branded materials would you like? I think it is a great idea and is the sort of thing a local chapter can be useful for to support the community and help spread the word. One thing that would imho be useful is to create flyers [1] to hand out to people who haven't heard about OSM to explain what OSM is about and why people should care to contribute. From what I have gathered, the German flyer [2] has been quite a success with apparently 40.000 flyers printed and distributed to date. There is now also an English flyer which the UK chapter distributes for free [3], but it only extends its offer to UK. So perhaps OSMF-US could print and distribute a similar flyer in the US, although it might be good to adapt it to fit the needs of the US better first. There is at least one English language flyer around. If I recall the biggest hold up is that nobody volunteered to do the actual mailings from a US address. Is somebody willing to do that? ideally, the volunteer would send out flyers each week in response to the requests. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Ideas for OSMF US Swag
I'd be happy to do some mailing. I don't have a whole lot of room to store boxes of pamphlets in my apartment, but I could do a few batches. On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 12:44 PM, Kate Chapman k...@maploser.com wrote: Richard is right, there is an English language flyer. I believe Frederik Ramm has it. If someone can volunteer to mail it that would be great. I'm home less than 50% of the year so I don't think I'm the right person. -Kate On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 12:09 PM, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote: On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 11:00 AM, Kai Krueger kakrue...@gmail.com wrote: Thea Aldrich wrote: Our question to the community is: If you like this idea, what types of branded materials would you like? I think it is a great idea and is the sort of thing a local chapter can be useful for to support the community and help spread the word. One thing that would imho be useful is to create flyers [1] to hand out to people who haven't heard about OSM to explain what OSM is about and why people should care to contribute. From what I have gathered, the German flyer [2] has been quite a success with apparently 40.000 flyers printed and distributed to date. There is now also an English flyer which the UK chapter distributes for free [3], but it only extends its offer to UK. So perhaps OSMF-US could print and distribute a similar flyer in the US, although it might be good to adapt it to fit the needs of the US better first. There is at least one English language flyer around. If I recall the biggest hold up is that nobody volunteered to do the actual mailings from a US address. Is somebody willing to do that? ideally, the volunteer would send out flyers each week in response to the requests. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Ideas for OSMF US Swag
I'm in the same boat as Ian with limited space in my apartment, but I'd love to help out with the mailing. -- Jim McAndrew On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 11:59 AM, Ian Dees ian.d...@gmail.com wrote: I'd be happy to do some mailing. I don't have a whole lot of room to store boxes of pamphlets in my apartment, but I could do a few batches. On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 12:44 PM, Kate Chapman k...@maploser.com wrote: Richard is right, there is an English language flyer. I believe Frederik Ramm has it. If someone can volunteer to mail it that would be great. I'm home less than 50% of the year so I don't think I'm the right person. -Kate On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 12:09 PM, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote: On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 11:00 AM, Kai Krueger kakrue...@gmail.com wrote: Thea Aldrich wrote: Our question to the community is: If you like this idea, what types of branded materials would you like? I think it is a great idea and is the sort of thing a local chapter can be useful for to support the community and help spread the word. One thing that would imho be useful is to create flyers [1] to hand out to people who haven't heard about OSM to explain what OSM is about and why people should care to contribute. From what I have gathered, the German flyer [2] has been quite a success with apparently 40.000 flyers printed and distributed to date. There is now also an English flyer which the UK chapter distributes for free [3], but it only extends its offer to UK. So perhaps OSMF-US could print and distribute a similar flyer in the US, although it might be good to adapt it to fit the needs of the US better first. There is at least one English language flyer around. If I recall the biggest hold up is that nobody volunteered to do the actual mailings from a US address. Is somebody willing to do that? ideally, the volunteer would send out flyers each week in response to the requests. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Ideas for OSMF US Swag
I have room at my house and plenty of experience mailing OSM swag out to people. I guess I should have been more clear. I totally would not have suggested we get swag and mail it to people if I wasn't willing to do the bulk of the heavy lifting. Though I do think it would be nice if we had a few volunteers from around the country shipping regionally. But we'll handle that farther down the road. Right now I just want to focus on picking awesome swag that people think will help mappers grow their local communities. Also, just to be clear, OSM-US can only afford to mail swag to people in the US. International postage rates end up making the cost of shipping more than the stuff we are sending. My two cents about the flyers. I really like the one produced by GeoFabrik. However, it might be nice to make a few tweeks to that model so its more US centric and plays better in this market. But thats just me... Thea ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Ideas for OSMF US Swag
I'd be glad to help out with pamphlets. And yes, we'll want to make tweaks to localize the document for a US audience. I'd be happy to take a crack at that. Jim, perhaps we should consider eventually posting softcopy with GeoBus materials? -- SEJ -- twitter: @geomantic -- skype: sejohnson8 A serious and good philosophical work could be written consisting entirely of jokes. -- Ludwig Wittgenstein On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 14:54, Thea Aldrich theaglit...@gmail.com wrote: I have room at my house and plenty of experience mailing OSM swag out to people. I guess I should have been more clear. I totally would not have suggested we get swag and mail it to people if I wasn't willing to do the bulk of the heavy lifting. Though I do think it would be nice if we had a few volunteers from around the country shipping regionally. But we'll handle that farther down the road. Right now I just want to focus on picking awesome swag that people think will help mappers grow their local communities. Also, just to be clear, OSM-US can only afford to mail swag to people in the US. International postage rates end up making the cost of shipping more than the stuff we are sending. My two cents about the flyers. I really like the one produced by GeoFabrik. However, it might be nice to make a few tweeks to that model so its more US centric and plays better in this market. But thats just me... Thea ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Ideas for OSMF US Swag
Hi, On Fri, 27 May 2011 12:09:20 -0400 Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote: There is at least one English language flyer around. If I recall the biggest hold up is that nobody volunteered to do the actual mailings from a US address. Is somebody willing to do that? ideally, the volunteer would send out flyers each week in response to the requests. Yes. The flyer is a direct translation of the German one. It is distributed in the UK by Andy Allan through his OpenCycleMap shop, free of charge for everyone; printing and shipping are sponsored by the publisher of our OSM book which gets a mention in the flyer. Our publisher is willing to do the same but it would need one person in the US to take delivery of the flyers and distribute them further. If anyone is interested, please get in touch. - Of course, OSMF US is also free to style their own flyer based on our layout and not use the publisher's sponsoring offer; I can make the SVGs available if anyone is interested. Bye Frederik ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] US highway classification
Richard Welty rwe...@averillpark.net writes: On 5/27/11 9:26 AM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: On 5/27/2011 12:32 AM, Nathan Mills wrote: Would I be correct in stating that tagging an undivided 2 lane (one lane in each direction) highways would be improper, even if a state calls the highway a trunk for planning purposes? Especially if it's in the middle of a town with a low speed limit. I understood trunk to be divided and limited access (but not fully grade-separated). No, trunk is also used for a major intercity highway that's not a freeway. Take a look at the UK and their network of trunks. and we have no functioning definition of what constitutes a major intercity highway in the US. which is to day, i don't agree with many of your upgrades, but i've chosen not to engage in an edit war in the map nor have i chosen to engage in flame wars on this list about it, but there is no consensus on what constitutes a trunk in the US, and i believe your position is an outlier. Emphatically seconded. I think it's clear that most of us think trunk is something that has some aspects of divided, particularly high speed, limited access above and beyond a normal two lane US highway. I find the trunk designation useful in that it tells the map viewer that the road is partway to feeling like an Interstate compared to feeling like a US highway. Marking roads as trunk when they aren't physically superior isn't helpful. pgpFMGOS1f1nR.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] US highway classification
Yeah, getting the definitions standardized has been thorny since day one. I myself have had issues staying consistent from one road to the next. There's just so much subtle differences between stretches of highways that make it difficult to say one way or the other. Personally, I prefer the trunk being a non-limited access highway that has some type of divider. Will use the Dumas to Texline stretch for example. This stretch is the main trucking highway between Dallas and Denver, and is pretty much divided highway for all areas, excluding the stretches through the small cities that haven't been bypassed. Otherwise this stretch might be considered a lonely stretch of little-traveled highway. This is where local knowledge comes in handy. If standards could be agreed upon, then things would really fly. Such are the perils of open sourcing... Jason On 5/27/2011 10:04 AM, Nathan Mills wrote: On Fri, 27 May 2011 09:26:41 -0400, Nathan Edgars II wrote: No, trunk is also used for a major intercity highway that's not a freeway. Take a look at the UK and their network of trunks. I'm sorry, I thought I posted to talk-us. My mistake. ;) Seems to me that trunk has no meaning if it is used in that way. In the UK, roads are classified based on the national government's classification of the roads (hence the confusing-to-us 'unclassified' tag. Since we don't have a single overarching national road network like that, I don't think that's a relevant model to use here. How would you apply this argument to the use of primary to tertiary in the US? Generally speaking, I think any divided and controlled access highway probably ought to be tagged as a motorway barring specific local circumstances that cause it to deserve a demotion and any divided, but merely limited access and not fully controlled access, highway probably ought to be tagged as trunk barring specific local circumstances. The 'major intercity' road ought to be tagged as primary unless there's a specific reason to upgrade, IMO. That leaves the data more useful to end users. Actually that leaves it less useful for users in cities, as then there are only two classifications for non-intercity highways, secondary and tertiary. Also, I don't know how major a road between Dumas, TX and Texline, TX really is. If it weren't a US highway, I'd probably demote it all the way to secondary. It's on the National Highway System, meaning the FHWA considers it to be a major road. It's probably the best route between Kansas City and Albuquerque. Also note the proposed translation on http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Highway_Functional_Classification_System , used by at least one mapper in Kansas. Principal arterials range from expressways to major two-lane intercity highways. -- Message: 3 Date: Fri, 27 May 2011 12:21:09 -0400 From: Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com To: talk-us@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [Talk-us] US highway classification Message-ID: 4ddfcf75.9080...@gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed On 5/27/2011 12:00 PM, Alex Mauer wrote: On 05/27/2011 09:06 AM, Richard Welty wrote: if you peruse the wiki, and make a reasonably through search for definitions of trunk in the US, you will find an extensive complex of contradictions and inconsistencies. Maybe someone should find all these and bring it up on the list so that a definition can be determined and the inconsistencies can be fixed? I have tried in the past. The problem is that nobody can agree on which definition to use (even in the trunks must have four lanes camp, there's the Texas style, where everything with four lanes and a median is trunk, and the expressway style, where only limited-access surface expressways are trunk). Hell, even motorway is controversial (Seattle's Alaskan Way Viaduct is marked as trunk when it should be motorway). I'm all for consistency, even if it's not the way I currently tag. But this doesn't seem to be an attainable goal. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] US highway classification
On Fri, 27 May 2011 12:17:53 -0400, Nathan Edgars II wrote: The 'major intercity' road ought to be tagged as primary unless there's a specific reason to upgrade, IMO. That leaves the data more useful to end users. Actually that leaves it less useful for users in cities, as then there are only two classifications for non-intercity highways, secondary and tertiary. Uh, what are you on about? Motorway itself doesn't necessarily imply intercity or intracity, and neither do any of the other classifications. I can think of several intercity county roads that ought not qualify for anything beyond unclassified (they're old routes with several bypasses) and several intracity routes that definitely ought to be classified as trunk or motorway. It comes down to how the highway is built and what the highway is. Also, I don't know how major a road between Dumas, TX and Texline, TX really is. If it weren't a US highway, I'd probably demote it all the way to secondary. It's on the National Highway System, meaning the FHWA considers it to be a major road. It's probably the best route between Kansas City and Albuquerque. I'm going to assume you mean 'best non-Interstate route'. Most of it isn't even four laned yet, although Texas has some of it under construction. Same goes for the segment between Clayton, NM and I-25, although there New Mexico is upgrading the road to four lane divided in one whack. Which, as an aside, makes for one incredibly long construction zone. Talking solely about relatively rural areas, it seems to me that by default the best non-motorway route between two regionally important cities should be tagged primary unless there's a reason to upgrade it to trunk based on the physical characteristics of the road. To me, trunk implies a divided 4 lane at worst, or arguably including a true super 2, of which I've seen a couple in Kansas (I think one of Oklahoma's turnpikes might also be a true super 2, but I haven't driven it personally). It just makes sense to me based on the way we build our roads here in the US. I maintain that tagging both two lane and four lane divided roads as trunk (not to mention the cases where it's used for a not-quite-a-motorway) makes the map much less useful for planning a route at a glance. Obviously, software can take the maxspeed and lanes tags into account when available but if I'm, for example, looking at some rendered tiles, that information is not available. We already have four other tags to indicate importance in a route network, so I don't see the downside to limiting trunk to roads where the physical characteristics imply a higher classification, as we already do with motorway. -wierdo ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] US highway classification
athan Mills nat...@nwacg.net wrote: On Fri, 27 May 2011 12:17:53 -0400, Nathan Edgars II wrote: The 'major intercity' road ought to be tagged as primary unless there's a specific reason to upgrade, IMO. That leaves the data more useful to end users. Actually that leaves it less useful for users in cities, as then there are only two classifications for non-intercity highways, secondary and tertiary. Uh, what are you on about? Motorway itself doesn't necessarily imply intercity or intracity, and neither do any of the other classifications. I can think of several intercity county roads that ought not qualify for anything beyond unclassified (they're old routes with several bypasses) and several intracity routes that definitely ought to be classified as trunk or motorway. It comes down to how the highway is built and what the highway is. Also, I don't know how major a road between Dumas, TX and Texline, TX really is. If it weren't a US highway, I'd probably demote it all the way to secondary. It's on the National Highway System, meaning the FHWA considers it to be a major road. It's probably the best route between Kansas City and Albuquerque. I'm going to assume you mean 'best non-Interstate route'. Most of it isn't even four laned yet, although Texas has some of it under construction. Same goes for the segment between Clayton, NM and I-25, although there New Mexico is upgrading the road to four lane divided in one whack. Which, as an aside, makes for one incredibly long construction zone. Talking solely about relatively rural areas, it seems to me that by default the best non-motorway route between two regionally important cities should be tagged primary unless there's a reason to upgrade it to trunk based on the physical characteristics of the road. To me, trunk implies a divided 4 lane at worst, or arguably including a true super 2, of which I've seen a couple in Kansas (I think one of Oklahoma's turnpikes might also be a true super 2, but I haven't driven it personally). It just makes sense to me based on the way we build our roads here in the US. I have driven on quite a few highways here in the USA that vary, mile by mile, in the number of lanes, how well they are graded, whether or not driveways connect directly to the highway, etc. This usually reflects their having been upgraded one piece at a time. Sections that pass through difficult terrain are often the last to be upgraded. Of course, whether or not a local politician has friends or relatives in the road-construction business makes a difference as well. If you classify these highways according to their importance to the transportation grid, then long sections, with variable physical characteristics, will be classified the same. -- John F. Eldredge -- j...@jfeldredge.com Reserve your right to think, for even to think wrongly is better than not to think at all. -- Hypatia of Alexandria ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] US highway classification
On Fri, 27 May 2011 21:26:53 -0500, John F. Eldredge wrote: I have driven on quite a few highways here in the USA that vary, mile by mile, in the number of lanes, how well they are graded, whether or not driveways connect directly to the highway, etc. This usually reflects their having been upgraded one piece at a time. Sections that pass through difficult terrain are often the last to be upgraded. Of course, whether or not a local politician has friends or relatives in the road-construction business makes a difference as well. If you classify these highways according to their importance to the transportation grid, then long sections, with variable physical characteristics, will be classified the same. Obviously some element of judgment is required no matter what. As you correctly point out, there is substantial variability in how roads are built in the US. If the substandard section is small, one could perhaps overlook it. If the upgraded section is small relative to the rest of the highway, perhaps it should not be used in determining the classification of the road. The intent here is not to classify solely on physical characteristics, but there is clearly a difference in the suitability of a road for long distance travel depending on whether it is 2 lane or 4 lane divided, and that should be reflected on the map, not just in tags. I wouldn't downgrade a rural Interstate from motorway just because there are two driveways in three hundred miles that might see use three or four times a year. Nor would I upgrade a hundred miles of US highway from primary merely because of a mile of divided highway and one grade separated interchange. Besides, if importance to the route network is the only consideration, we ought not be using trunk at all or all US highways ought to be classed as trunk. It seems obvious to me that neither can possibly be the sole consideration. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] US highway classification
On 5/27/2011 9:51 PM, Nathan Mills wrote: On Fri, 27 May 2011 12:17:53 -0400, Nathan Edgars II wrote: Also, I don't know how major a road between Dumas, TX and Texline, TX really is. If it weren't a US highway, I'd probably demote it all the way to secondary. It's on the National Highway System, meaning the FHWA considers it to be a major road. It's probably the best route between Kansas City and Albuquerque. I'm going to assume you mean 'best non-Interstate route'. Most of it isn't even four laned yet, although Texas has some of it under construction. Same goes for the segment between Clayton, NM and I-25, although there New Mexico is upgrading the road to four lane divided in one whack. Which, as an aside, makes for one incredibly long construction zone. I mean best route, period. There's no diagonal Interstate there. You seem to be arguing for using physical characteristics for trunk. But I (and some other mappers) don't see why this is necessary. Hence no consensus. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] US highway classification
On 5/27/2011 10:41 PM, Nathan Mills wrote: Besides, if importance to the route network is the only consideration, we ought not be using trunk at all or all US highways ought to be classed as trunk. Eh? A lot of U.S. Highways are no longer the most important highways, since they are paralleled by Interstates. Others never were the primary route (US 6 between Chicago and northwestern Pennsylvania, for example). In other cases, state-numbered highways are more major than roughly parallel U.S. Highways (example: SR 111 in eastern Tennessee is a four-lane Appalachian corridor, while US 127, a county to the east, is somewhat less). ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
