I sometimes think those of us who speak a dialect of English other than that of the UK should simply view tag values as “code words” and not worry about the definition is.
We already have wiki pages dedicated to helping translate local road levels into OSM/UK road classifications. Just accept that UK/OSM “unclassified” does not mean unclassified in any context other than OSM/UK roads. Just accept that it is a meaningless series of letters and could just as easily be something like “x23q”. Use it as a code word index into the wiki page for your country on what type of road that represents. Looking at the wiki page for my country’s agreed upon translation, I tag public roads that are below that of a tertiary but do not have houses on them as “unclassified”. If the agency maintaining the road has placed markers, even just little inconspicuous ones, that list their reference ID for the road then I consider that fair game to tag as either ref or unsigned_ref (generally I’ll go with unsigned ref if the signs are not specifically designed for the motorist to see and use for guidance). > On May 7, 2018, at 11:24 AM, Erkin Alp Güney <erkinalp9...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Russia is an example of this, they have many unpaved quarternary and > quinary roads. > > 07-05-2018 21:13 tarihinde Kevin Kenny yazdı: >> On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 12:47 PM, yo paseopor <yopaseo...@gmail.com >> <mailto:yopaseo...@gmail.com>> wrote: >> >> The topic is the classification of OSM is not the same as >> countries have, and this make troubles. An UNCLASSIFIED road as >> its name says it is unclassified...but when you need some road >> classification with a step more than tertiary then you use >> unclassified, and if the road has ref...you put in then. Why don't >> you reorder the tertiary roads? They also catch your less thant >> tertiary roads in your country. Also it is the same problem with >> trunk or primary: whatis the difference between trunk of one lane >> per direction and a primary road? Also you have the issue if you >> consider the administrative classification as we do some >> countries: a trunk may be a trunk because being managed by one >> specific administration? WTF? Is it good for the map? All the >> roads by a local administration should be unclassified? It is a >> complicated problem. I suggest to reclassify the other roads in >> their grades to make unclassified roads unclassified as the name >> says it. >> >> >> One issue is that we have the "UK English is the language of tagging" >> rule - which widely gets interpreted as "highway classification must >> be force-fit into the UK system." The US system presents a complex >> problem for this, since most highway classification is delegated to >> the states, and they all have their own local schemes. >> >> In many counties in the US, rural roads are unnamed and have only >> reference numbers. A farm road may be "County Road 2200N" (which is a >> different classification from, say, "County Highway 23", and typically >> shown only on small blade signs, not banner signs) or "State Farm and >> Market Road #2134". As I understand it, it would fit pretty closely >> with what "unclassified" roads - which are a formal classification in >> the UK! - are understood to be. >> >> Near where I live, numbered 'US', 'State' and many 'County' roads do >> NOT reflect the governing body - they are all managed by the state >> department of transportation. Historically, they had other structures, >> but responsibilities were reallocated. The 'US' highway numbers are >> coordinated with neighbouring states, but the administration is by the >> state. There are also numbered but (nearly) unsigned 'reference >> routes' also maintained by the state to 'State' highway standards. I >> say 'nearly' unsigned because they do often have inconspicuous >> chaining markers with their numbers. >> >> Rather than labeling the governing body, the 'US', 'State' and >> 'County' designations around here reflect the grade of importance, >> expected level of traffic and expected quality of maintenance. Given >> that the designation reflects relative importance rather than >> administrative jurisdiction, despite the labeling, I'm comfortable >> with having US, State, and County numbered roads be 'primary', >> 'secondary' and 'tertiary' - but in the places where the counties >> number virtually every road, there is a need for a tier below >> 'tertiary' - and 'unclassified' seems to be it; it's a working >> category that might otherwise be 'quaternary.' >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Tagging mailing list >> Tagging@openstreetmap.org >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > > > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
