On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 1:34 AM, John Smith <deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com>wrote:
> 2009/12/29 Steve Bennett <stevag...@gmail.com>: > > What's so important about traffic_calming tags? True, they will affect > > accurate trip time planning, but is that it? > > He's assuming it's a objective way to map residential streets, main > through fares generally don't have traffic calming devices. > > However that doesn't always hold water here since those ways might be > the main shopping area of small towns, so you need to distinguish them > from alternative routes as well. Honestly, I don't know if speed bumps would come into play or not. I kind of assume there wouldn't be a primary road which has speed bumps, but I'm willing to be proven wrong on that. Furthermore, there might not be any road which would have been defined as primary were it not for the speed bumps, so this part of the definition might be irrelevant. I don't know what the perfect definition is. But I think we'd be much better off putting in a definition, looking at the map, tweaking the definition, looking at the map again, etc. until we have something we like, then telling people "go map primary/secondary/tertiary based on whatever definition you feel like using" and expecting to get very useful results. I don't think this can be completely > tagged in an objective manner like that simply because some streets > that are now less important for traffic are still very important for > pedestrian traffic and where pedestrians want to drive to before they > become pedestrians. > I'm not sure what exactly that means, but whatever it does mean, why can't it be incorporated into the definition?
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
