Re: [Talk-us] Trunk versus motorway

Hi folks, This conversation is over. If we can't have a conversation about highway tagging without making personal attacks, then we can't have the conversation. Please work harder to stay on topic, have empathy towards your fellow mapper, and have constructive conversations. The mailing list is

Re: [Talk-us] Trunk versus motorway

The reason you don't get it is because you are not listening. Nobody has said the motorway tagging should continue through the intersection. The debate is entirely about where the classification change takes place. There are several instances in Arkansas where a motorway ends similarly. In

Re: [Talk-us] Trunk versus motorway

Links please? On Sun, Dec 2, 2018, 3:06 PM Paul Johnson > > On Sun, Dec 2, 2018 at 5:04 PM Evin Fairchild wrote: > >> You are proving my point once again re misrepresentation of what we're >> saying. It would only be accurate for you to say that we're going against >> federal guidelines is if

Re: [Talk-us] Trunk versus motorway

Sure thing, go back to about the last year of his edits. On Sun, Dec 2, 2018 at 5:06 PM Evin Fairchild wrote: > Can you provide changesets showing where NE2 mass edited motorways in the > way you're describing? > > On Sun, Dec 2, 2018, 3:02 PM Paul Johnson >> >> >> On Sun, Dec 2, 2018 at 4:58

Re: [Talk-us] Trunk versus motorway

On Sun, Dec 2, 2018 at 5:04 PM Evin Fairchild wrote: > You are proving my point once again re misrepresentation of what we're > saying. It would only be accurate for you to say that we're going against > federal guidelines is if we were to say that the motorway should continue > thru the at

Re: [Talk-us] Trunk versus motorway

Can you provide changesets showing where NE2 mass edited motorways in the way you're describing? On Sun, Dec 2, 2018, 3:02 PM Paul Johnson > > On Sun, Dec 2, 2018 at 4:58 PM Thomas Silas wrote: > >> As for the situation in question: I agree with the vast majority of the >> posters both in the

Re: [Talk-us] Trunk versus motorway

You are proving my point once again re misrepresentation of what we're saying. It would only be accurate for you to say that we're going against federal guidelines is if we were to say that the motorway should continue thru the at grade intersection. None of us are saying that! I'm really getting

Re: [Talk-us] Trunk versus motorway

On Sun, Dec 2, 2018 at 4:58 PM Thomas Silas wrote: > As for the situation in question: I agree with the vast majority of the > posters both in the changeset and in talk-us. There are countless examples > of the motorway tag extending to the first intersection (or to a visible > change in road

Re: [Talk-us] Trunk versus motorway

On Sun, Dec 2, 2018 at 4:30 PM Evin Fairchild wrote: > Once again, I see you're misrepresenting the discussion and trying to make > us look like a bunch of idiots for not accepting your way of doing things. > There's no way you're so dense as to assume that because we pretty much all > want the

Re: [Talk-us] Trunk versus motorway

On Sun, Dec 2, 2018 at 4:19 PM Adam Franco wrote: > I'm not saying that the surface junction itself would still be motorway > (or even the area of reduced speed approaching it), but once one is far > enough beyond those limiting features and the speeds and other aspects are > the same as the

Re: [Talk-us] Trunk versus motorway

Once again, I see you're misrepresenting the discussion and trying to make us look like a bunch of idiots for not accepting your way of doing things. There's no way you're so dense as to assume that because we pretty much all want the motorway designation to extend all the way to the first at

Re: [Talk-us] Trunk versus motorway

I'm not saying that the surface junction itself would still be motorway (or even the area of reduced speed approaching it), but once one is far enough beyond those limiting features and the speeds and other aspects are the same as the rest of the motorway, the roadway is functionally a motorway. I

Re: [Talk-us] Trunk versus motorway

Unsubscribe On Wed, Nov 28, 2018, 6:18 PM Paul Johnson Can I get some voice of reason in > https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/64919426? There seems to be > quite a few people (and one AARoads forum troll egging it on) that are > trying to propel the idea that motorways have at-grade

Re: [Talk-us] Trunk versus motorway

The commonly accepted definition of freeways in the US excludes surface junctions, whereas expressways (trunks) does include intersections. I honestly am surprised a group of roadgeeks isn't more attuned to this distinction. On Sun, Dec 2, 2018 at 3:15 PM Adam Franco wrote: > On Sun, Dec 2,

Re: [Talk-us] Trunk versus motorway

On Sun, Dec 2, 2018 at 1:36 AM Paul Johnson wrote: > > On Sun, Dec 2, 2018 at 12:30 AM Bryan Housel wrote: > >> I do understand your point, but a dozen or so people on talk-us and the >> six or so people on that changeset 64919426 >> > > Well, 1 person, an AA roads troll and like 5 sockpuppets.

Re: [Talk-us] Trunk versus motorway

On Sun, Dec 2, 2018 at 12:30 AM Bryan Housel wrote: > On Dec 2, 2018, at 12:42 AM, Paul Johnson wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 8:37 PM Bryan Housel wrote: > >> Can’t a motorway* begin or end* at an at-grade intersection though? >> > > No, I don't think so. It's at least not a freeway

Re: [Talk-us] Trunk versus motorway

> On Dec 2, 2018, at 12:42 AM, Paul Johnson wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 8:37 PM Bryan Housel > wrote: > Can’t a motorway begin or end at an at-grade intersection though? > > No, I don't think so. It's at least not a freeway traffic pattern on the > side

Re: [Talk-us] Trunk versus motorway

On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 8:37 PM Bryan Housel wrote: > Can’t a motorway* begin or end* at an at-grade intersection though? > No, I don't think so. It's at least not a freeway traffic pattern on the side heading towards the intersection. > What you did by classifying it “trunk” back to the

Re: [Talk-us] Trunk versus motorway

On Sat, Dec 1, 2018 at 11:01 PM wrote: > [forwarding this to talk-us, sent privately in error] > > -Original Message- > From: Richie Kennedy > Sent: Saturday, December 1, 2018 1:19 PM > To: Paul Johnson > Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Trunk versus motorway > > >

Re: [Talk-us] Trunk versus motorway

[forwarding this to talk-us, sent privately in error] -Original Message- From: Richie Kennedy Sent: Saturday, December 1, 2018 1:19 PM To: Paul Johnson Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Trunk versus motorway > On Nov 29, 2018, at 8:34 PM, Paul Johnson wrote: > > Single carriage

Re: [Talk-us] Trunk versus motorway

"Tagging freeway ending/beginnings with this scheme is definitely not standard practice in the US" By "this scheme," do you mean motorway up to intersection or motorway only up to last ramp merge? The former is almost everywhere in the US and I very rarely see the latter. Even after browsing the

Re: [Talk-us] Trunk versus motorway

> Can I get some voice of reason in > https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/64919426? There seems to be quite > a few people (and one AARoads forum troll egging it on) that are trying to > propel the idea that motorways have at-grade intersections, which is > obviously incorrect. I know I'm

Re: [Talk-us] Trunk versus motorway

I'm largely in agreement and this seems like how it's been done in practice. Would also apply to WA 500 (which also should be a trunk east of I 205, if not at least 112th/Gher; with argument supporting 205 being that 112th/Gher is largely only used by way of it's I 205 North exit and supporting

Re: [Talk-us] Trunk versus motorway

Bryan Housel writes: > Can’t a motorway begin or end at an at-grade intersection though? Certainly, and I think the question is how long does a stretch of road that meets motorway specs have to be to be tagged motorway. The basic issue is that "not having at-grade intersections" is not a local

Re: [Talk-us] Trunk versus motorway

Can’t a motorway begin or end at an at-grade intersection though? What you did by classifying it “trunk” back to the Apache Street interchange just looks weird. Sorry, but I have to disagree, and would leave it as a motorway up to Gilcrease, then trunk beyond that point. For comparison, our