Talk:Lt:WikiProject Lithuania

secondary/tertiary in proposed definitions

based on Lithuania content:

"The following mapping is proposed: secondary -- county roads (paved) tertiary -- county roads (unpaved)"

This proposed mapping is a quite poor idea. It would mean that in some cases road would keep switching from paved to unpaved, despite that its importance would be the same.

This proposed idea would conflict with general attempt to represent road importance in unusually bad ways. I would urge to use some different way to recognize it. Or at least, for start, do not upgrade unpaved roads to higher class just because tiny segment is paved.

For example it is absurd to have highway=tertiary and then have disjointed section of highway=secondary on a bridge, just because bridge surface is paved

Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 18:27, 4 June 2022 (UTC)

I join Mateusz, it is not a good idea to deviate from the universal highway definition (that it is a hierarchy representing the road importance) and apply physical criteria, which usually are recorded with different tags. —Dieterdreist (talk) 20:44, 4 June 2022 (UTC)

I'll have to agree with above. We have surface tagging for differentiating paved from unpaved. Makes no sense to change class back and forth for a road with same ref and name. Do any other countries use class based on surface? Gazer75 (talk) 22:10, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

I completely agree with Mateusz. -- Something B (talk)