On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 16:55, Mike N. <[email protected]> wrote: > >> The problem connector is also named US81...etc, as well as containing the >> routing relation 135 South. I believe that is what disrupted the >> routing. > > A further clarification - the connection from 81 to 254 would be a > secondary_link , since the road to which it connects is secondary. If it > connected with another motorway, the connecting road would be a > motorway_link.
Actually, I'd say that the most common method (and what it sounds like the map features page on the wiki says) is to tag the "higher" of the two road classes for *_link, rather than the class of the road being connected to. So the correct tag would be motorway_link when leaving or joining a motorway regardless of the class of the other road, trunk_link if one road is a trunk and the other is anything other than motorway, and so on. It also looks like, from what I can see on aerial photos, the highway=motorway designation could apply further east for another couple miles, but I'll let someone with local knowledge make the decision there. -- David J. Lynch [email protected] _______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
