If we talk of harmonization, we have to look outside of Europe and the major
industrialized countries. The highway classsification based on infrastructures
such as motorways and trunk roads is not adapted to the majority of the
countries or regions.
In countries or vast regions with no motorway, should we consider primary roads
the same level as motorways? Or classify as trunk for the renderer?
Le vendredi 23 février 2018 11:16:45 HNE, djakk djakk
<djakk.dj...@gmail.com> a écrit :
I know that « trunk » is country-dependent but why not moving it to a
worldwide definition ? Administrative classification could be moved to other
Le ven. 23 févr. 2018 à 16:06, Matej Lieskovský <lieskovsky.ma...@gmail.com> a
I'd like to caution against using this system globally. In Czechia, roads are
formally classified into classes, which influence signage, ref numbers and so
on. Deploying this system here would make the tag confusing/useless and would
likely face enormous backlash. I have no problems with using this system in
countries without a clearly defined road classification, but please don't touch
the countries where there is no doubt about what class any given road is.Happy
On 22 February 2018 at 16:20, djakk djakk <djakk.dj...@gmail.com> wrote:
I totally agree with you, the definition you provide, administrative-free,
tends to the same osm map between countries.
Le jeu. 15 févr. 2018 à 19:18, Fernando Trebien <fernando.treb...@gmail.com> a
Landing on this discussion several months late. I've just heard of it
by reading a wiki talk page .
Since 13 February 2009, the wiki  criticises highway classification
as problematic/unverifiable. This has also been subject to a lot of
controversy (and edit wars) in my local community (Brazil), especially
regarding the effect of (lack of) pavement.
In trying to achieve greater consensus some years ago, I decided to
seek opinions elsewhere and finally I arrived at this scheme  which
I think is very useful, if not perfect yet. It can be easily
summarised like this:
- trunk: best routes between large/important cities
- primary: best routes between cities and above
- secondary: best routes between towns/suburbs and above
- tertiary: best routes between villages/neighbourhoods and above
- unclassified: best routes between other place=* and above
For example, the best route between two villages would be at least
tertiary. So would be the best route between a village and a town or a
city. Parts of this route might have a higher class in case they are
part of a route between more important places.
It surely raises the problem of determining optimal routes. Maybe a
sensible criterion would be average travel time without traffic
congestion. A number of vehicles may be selected for this average -
could be motorcycle+car+bus+truck, or simply car+truck.
Early results in my area [4, in Portuguese] seem promising and have
produced more consensus than any previous proposals. To me, this
method seems to:
- resist alternations in classification along the same road
- work across borders (where classification discontinuities are
expected because each country is using different classification
- account for road network topology
- work in countries with mostly precarious/unpaved roads or
without/unknown official highway classes
- work between settlements as well as within settlements
Borderline cases are probably inescapable in any system that does not
use solely criteria that are directly verifiable - from the ground, or
from the law. Maybe, in certain developed countries, the system is so
well organized that merely checking signs/laws is sufficient. That
does not mean it is like that everywhere on the planet.
OSM has so far received a lot of input from communities in developed
countries (mostly Europe, North America and Australia) and hasn't
given much attention to less developed/organized countries. What comes
closest to this is what the HOT Team does, but the judgment of road
classification one can do from satellite images in a foreign country
is much more limited than the criteria that have been raised in this
thread so far.
I wouldn't endorse tags such as maxspeed:practical due to lack of
verifiability (it should be obvious that different types of vehicles
would achieve different practical speeds). It is better to use the
legal speed in maxspeed=* and describe the practical reason for a
lower speed using surface=*, smoothness=*, and, who knows, maybe the
not yet approved hazard=*  (though that is intended for signed
hazards, not subjective/opinionated hazards).
For the sake of long-term sanity, I also wouldn't mix the purpose of
one tag with the purpose of other tags. To describe the surface, there
is surface=*, smoothness=* and tracktype=*. To describe access rights,
there is access=*, foot=*, bicycle=*, motor_vehicle=*, etc. To
describe legal speed, maxspeed=*. To describe curves, there's
Purpose, perhaps, is the main issue. What is the purpose of highway
classification? Is it to save us the work of adding extra tags? Is it
to allow the renderer to produce a cleaner output at low zoom levels?
Is it to allow routers to assume default speeds? Maybe to guide their
routing heuristics? Is it to express some sort of importance? If so,
by which perspective - urbanistic, traffic engineering, movement,
commercial value, cultural/fame, historic, some combination of those?
Should the purpose be the same in every country?
It may be interesting to also discuss the classification adopted by
other maps. I don't have a reference for Google (originally TeleAtlas)
or Here.com (originally Navteq), but Waze publishes its per-country
road classification criteria in its wiki. [6-16]
+55 (51) 99962-5409
"Nullius in verba."
talk mailing list
talk mailing list
talk mailing list
talk mailing list