It seems this changeset caused some parts of Tsing Sha Highway to become `highway=motorway_link`, which seems like a mistake.

As of writing these mistakes should be mostly fixed.

Reverted via osm.org/changeset/169116643

Re Shing Mun Tunnel & Airport, other than it being the Old Road, I see this is only because SMT is only $5 and TSH is $8, and this usage pattern will most likely go away when $5 -> $8. (They say both side mileage is similar but TSH is friendlier on engine wear.)

Back to here, when I really think about it, I think you are right. If I am not mistaken from the AADT stats, it seems about 33% of relevant traffic actually goes through the Old Road.

To reiterate, I have no idea why the ratio is this high, and I really feel this should be `=tertiary`, but looking back at OSM principles, I should just take this as "the locals do be like that" and restore the Old Road to be `=secondary`.

Hi there! To denote a path in construction, simply change `highway=???` to a `highway=construction` and a `construction=???`.

You may use `note=?` to further describe what is going on.

To be fair, this is my first time knowing about AADT, so I don't know how to respond to this.

It seems strange heavy vehicles are disallowed to go uphill but are allowed downhill.

From the many available bus videos passing by at the lower end, I can repeatedly see the signage to be something like this:
"Go forward for Sai Kung"
"Go left for Fei Ngo Shan"
No "alternative routes" specified for Sai Kung, which would otherwise justify `=secondary`. (I think Kam Tin Bypass has a "alternative route to Kam Tin" somewhere...)

It really seems like the Old Road is not supposed to handle cross-district traffic. It actually being physically capable of doing so seems like a coincidence, so it really cannot be `=secondary`.

Again, this feels like a local road that is extra long and open on both ends.

How do you think about these?

I also vaguely remember there might be relevant discussions before.

With this section of road having `share_taxi=no`, perhaps the ring outside the airport is not intended. (iirc this road was made just to connect to the newly opened railway station, and is therefore quite local).

But we can revisit this when Kam Ho Road widening is complete.

Re Pok Fu Lam Road, I see the `=secondary` section is essentially the only path towards the `=primary` section, so it makes sense for them to be `=secondary`, though it makes that area full of `=secondary` roads, which is unavoidable.

Still, again, looking at Castle Peak Road Tsuen Wan, Belvedere Garden section, does it make sense to promote it to `=secondary`? Eastbound vehicles can take the turn into the Old Road, which I think is similar to the situation here at Clear Water Bay Road. It's shorter too, just like the situation here, with possibly coordinated traffic lights. But no one would do that; they would just continue on towards Hoi On Road.

Re Fei Ngo Shan Road, while one may argue it wants to connect with Clear Water Bay Road and so the relevant section should be at least `=secondary`, one may also consider that the vehicle essentially still stays inside some local roads until the turn to the New Road near Good Hope School, at which point it promotes to `=primary`. It is then a pure coincidence the vehicle is passing through the Old Road, and then the Old Road does not have obvious importance.

Also consider KMB 91/91M, sometimes when they are sending trips from UST to Kowloon, depending on the vehicle running the trip, they just have to take the New Road and omit stops because the Old Road is just too difficult to maneuver (I think is vehicle length restriction). Further argument for why the Old Road is just not as important as `=secondary`.

It's just like CPR-TsuenWan, except this time the local road is longer, and may by coincidence also support cross-district traffic.

Thus, I think the Clear Water Bay Road (old section) should be `=tertiary` instead of the inaccurate `=secondary`.

Also, with the New Road allowing and supporting 70kph traffic through a not-so-steep path, I do not see the importance of the Old Road other than "it is shorter".

Re Kam Tin, at least the replaced road is mostly flat, so it makes sense to see `highway=secondary`.

Looking back here, the Old Road is very steep and has many traffic lights. It's way too difficult to maneuver through the Old Road. I don't see how the Old Road is worth a `=secondary` classification.

This is why the quoted precedent is Castle Peak Road Tsuen Wan.

That's a good question.

This road at minimum provides access to the motorbike parking, but when Hoi Wang Road explicitly disallows u-turns, it's natural for vehicles to take this "access road" to u-turn.

idk, this road just seems like a hassle-free way to do u-turns in this area, because blindly going through the nearby junctions would mean waiting too long at non-linked traffic lights.

Re 2, an example see Graphhopper, with https://graphhopper.com/maps/?point=22.332274%2C114.160422&point=22.329346%2C114.161318&profile=car&layer=OpenStreetMap

Your argument would be very convincing if this were a "partial-day designated pedestrian area" (what's the exact term?) but again, that's not the case here. So no.

To quote the wiki itself:

osm.wiki/Tag:highway%3Dpedestrian

> Vehicle traffic is generally restricted [...]

Clearly, that's not the case for Ki Lung Street.

For the many routers that rely on OSM data, them skipping `=pedestrian` for motor vehicles is expected behavior. Then, having `=pedestrian` simply misleads them to believe Ki Lung Street is inaccessible to cars.

Further improved via osm.org/changeset/166573618

After some thinking, I think you are right. I will change the `motorway` back to `motorway_link`.

But the `primary` is staying since it just conveniently and accurately describes the extent of the tunnel area.

By survey, the TM-CLK Highway terminates as currently mapped (right outside the HK-ZH-MO bridge clearance building).

To elaborate on my Route3/Route9 point, observe that Tsing Long Highway is constructed in a way that makes one think it is "intended" to go north towards Route 9. Then, observe here that the Tunnel similarly is constructed in a way that makes one think it is "intended" to go to the Airport. The road towards Airport is one whole structure with a median; that's a clear indication it's the "main path".

Also consider other peripheral hints. The namesake of the project hints that the Tunnel is intended to connect to Airport. The path towards airport is almost capable of supporting 3 lanes.

Contrast with Route2/Route4 where no such "main path" exists, and also Route3/Route4 where the supposed "main path" quickly splits into many obvious `_link`s.

Ultimately, the goals of the changeset:
- highlight the main path (ie `motoway_link` becomes `motorway`)
- correctly indicate tunnel area (ie everything else becomes `primary/_link`)

Improved via osm.org/changeset/166309084

Re 1: this style references Route3/Route9 Tsing Long Highway having `=motorway` all the way through.

Re 2: perhaps I can just extend `=primary` to reach the roundabout. A supporting argument: Chek Lap Kok Road has inter-district abilities by leading Tuen Mun vehicles to access the airport support area.

Re @Patrickov, I think their point is more focused on debating "motorway_link is wrong" with "argument by absurdness": if motorway_link can be doubted as "this should be motorway instead", then every other "*_link" can do the same, and then there cannot be any progress.

Let's not start an edit war on this. Why would "=motorway" be reasonable?

I want to point out that Sha Lek Highway is designated as an expressway, while Airport Road is not.

If the standards require that only numbered expressways get "=motorroad", then I do not understand why this section of Airport Road should also get "=motorroad". I see no problem demoting the highway down to "=primary" the instant it is no longer a numbered highway.

For example, Route 7 (TKO side) instantly demotes to "=secondary" right as it ends.