80n wrote: > Agree, although someone commented recently that many secondary roads > imported by TIGER should more realistically be tagged as tertiary.
Also, if you're referring to my post on the US regional list, I'm still kind of up in the air about it. I think I see a need for a road level between tertiary and unclassified. County highways (imported from TIGER as secondary) are generally larger and/or more significant than the other roads around them, but usually less so than state highways which are also imported from TIGER as secondary. But then, some county highways are larger than some state highways, so it's kind of a toss-up. I think my proposal, http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Proposed_features/Highway_administrative_and_physical_descriptions attempts to address this kind of problem. -Alex Mauer "hawke" _______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
