On 3 July 2010 11:37, John Smith <[email protected]> wrote: > Personally I don't see a point for anything but motorway_link, but > what is the difference between what you said and what others are > suggesting for other *_link roads?
Firstly, I haven't suggested anything for *_link roads, I've simply disagreed with your assertion that our use of the highway tagging represents tagging for the renderer. On balance I tend to prefer links that know what type of road they belong to. As noted, this is indispensable for motorways, because: * Many (most?) countries support the concept of motorway regulations and we need to mark the point from which they apply * We want our navigation apps to be able to give instructions about entering the motorway And it so happens that having that tag also does the right thing for renderers too. I think the concept works well for other road classes too - a trunk link is: * one that leads inescapably to a trunk road -or- * One that diverges from a trunk road and can only be reached by the trunk road And so on for other road classes. I'm concerned here more with access ramps - roundabout avoidance lanes and suchlike probably could, in many cases, be sufficiently catered for by a generic highway=link tag. This could be used by mappers who feel there's no obvious ownership of the link by one road or the other and renderers could be permitted to colour it according to whichever of the above-argued logics proves most compelling. But sneaky wiki changes to subvert established tagging practices one newbie at a time just isn't big or clever - so don't do that. Dermot -- -------------------------------------- Iren sind menschlich _______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
