2009/7/31 Greg Troxel <[email protected]>: > I object to the notion that there should be a different relationship > between residential/unclassified in urban vs rural areas. We already > have too much of that, and I think it's a sign our definitions are off > base. There's no clear boundary, and we have to translate this to > garmin, etc., use in Free nav programs, and render, so people doing > things differently based on where they are or what they're used to seems > like trouble. That said, I see the trouble with the secondary/tertiary > definition (will send separately about that).
Well, I just see it as a hierarchical line: residential unclassified tert sec prim trunk motorway it's simple as that, and I don't see any problem. > To me these are both > real streets that you can drive on > roads you would probably only use to get to places near them > and the only difference is that residential means it's mostly bordered > by residences. nah, not all streets where someone lives nearby are residential streets. They are just then residential streets, if they are small and used only/mainly by residents. Big streets with external traffic are never residential streets, even if people live there. > Arguably the whole notion of highway=residential is > somewhat broken, since residences nearby should be landuse=residential > polygons, but it does affect the feel of the road and it runs pretty > deep in osm, so I won't really object. It's an easy way to speed up routing calculation and to improve the results. > Perhaps we need a specific highway=alley tag to say "this is a road you > can drive on, but it's definitely narrow/inferior and you don't want to > go there unless you have to in order to get somewhere". we already have this. Highway=service, service=alley. cheers, Martin _______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
