Talk:Key:expressway
Implied access restrictions
The proposal mentions implicit access restrictions that are not mentioned in the main article. These proposed default restrictions are very similar to motorroad=*. Considering the expansion of the use of this tag abroad and the possible future implications for routing, is it safe to assume that these restrictions generally do not apply to expressway=yes? --Fernando Trebien (talk) 14:36, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
- Here in Oregon almost all expressways allow pedestrians and bikes, and in California some do. So I would not assume any default access. --Jeisenbe (talk) 02:04, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
Applicability to Super Twos
The main page currently describes the expressway=yes tag applying to divided highways with limited access. In my country (the USA), there are many highways that are built differently from normal roads and have limited access, but are not divided. These are referred to as Super Twos. Should we change the main page on this tag so that expressway=yes can be used on Super Twos, or should we create a new tag to describe them (or is there an existing tag that I'm not finding)? My reasoning for wanting to remove the divided highway restriction for this tag is that OSM has other ways of mapping divided highways.
Aweech (talk) 02:18, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
- @Aweech: I explained it as an exception on the new Dual carriageway page I made just because of your observation :) --Lectrician1 (talk) 03:53, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
- I disagree with that. Talk:Dual_carriageway#"Exception" ---- Kovposch (talk) 08:01, 5 May 2021 (UTC).
- This tag is basically useless except for to denote some random meanings of "expressway" someone find applicable locally, unlike the legal meaning of motorroad=*. More precise and specific terms should be used for its attributes. There appears to be access_control=* in use:
- @Kovposch: If I'm not mistaken, expressway=yes basically corresponds to whatever would be signposted with File:MUTCD W19-2.svg. It's probably less rigorous than motorroad=* but not quite subjective. But instead of saying so explicitly, the page tries to predict what would be posted with that sign. I think that's where it gets into trouble. – Minh Nguyễn 💬 16:56, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
- I was too extreme, but the word "expressway" is really extremely broad. In a few countries, it is equivalent to highway=motorway. Many freeways are called "Expressway" in their names. Some may expect an "expressway" will be grade-separated and uninterrupted, when it can simply be a high-speed limited-access road with widely-spaced signalized junctions. So I have the worry it is too confusing (to compare: much more than motorway=* in Proposed_features/Motorway_indication; motorroad=* is unambiguously a legal designation). Must it be signed to qualify for this tag then? (example comparison: Highways England is treating some roads as "expressway" as a policy only, not used for road users) ---- Kovposch (talk) 17:21, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
@Kovposch: This page is trying to describe "expressway" as used in American traffic engineering jargon. Signage just happens to be the main way that jargon leaks into public consciousness. So the other problem with this key's name is that "expressway" is colloquially understood in other ways by the general public. In some parts of the U.S., every freeway (motorway) is named "____ Expressway", while in other parts of the country, "Expressway" means the road is definitely not a freeway. If an editor were to label an expressway=yes field as "Expressway", there could be some degree of confusion on the part of new mappers.
One thing I can say for sure: colloquial American English should not be the basis for tag vocabulary: last I checked this survey, people in two-thirds of the U.S. calls motorways "highways", the other third "freeways", and there are scattered cities where people call them "expressways", "throughways", or "turnpikes". And plenty of people across the South don't even have a word for them.
– Minh Nguyễn 💬 20:02, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for the tip Kovposch about access_control=*; that's just the sort of tag I was looking for. It's a shame that it's undocumented though. It appears to be an old tag that's used primarily in Maryland and Kentucky with separate values for fully and partially controlled highways. -Aweech (talk) 16:26, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
- I believe at that time I found that access_control is also directly used in some state (and federal) GIS database. That may be one possible motivation, aside from its standard usage on road access management policies. ---- Kovposch (talk) 17:21, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
Criticism of highway=trunk in Poland
"In some areas highway=trunk, for example in Poland, are misused to map expressways - rather than using highway=trunk for roads forming main road network."
I removed this sentence for the following reasons:
- Using highway=trunk to map expressways is not misuse. The definition of highway=trunk is: either high performance or high importance, depending on local tagging conventions. Expressways are high performance.
- Apparently the Polish community does not see this as misuse either - otherwise they would not use the tag like this. The wiki should not present a minority viewpoint as if it is the majority viewpoint.
- Even if people tend to use highway=trunk incorrectly, the warning should be placed on the highway=trunk page instead.
- Polish use or misuse of highway=trunk is irrelevant for the description of the expressway tag, because the expressway tag is not used in Poland (the motorroad tag is).
The relation between highway=trunk and expressway=yes is explained in an earlier paragraph in the introduction. I have further elaborated this paragraph. This should clarify the argument that both tags do not need to be connected, without accusing Poland or other areas of tag misuse.
--JeroenvanderGun (talk) 15:07, 24 July 2021 (UTC)