That brings us back to the question of what is a “street”, and what’s a “name” on roadways. Streets are mainly named for addressing. Roads are sorta named for planning, engineering, and construction purposes first. Eg a “street” can be named from a series of differently planned roads, and a road can be broken down into different street name sections (usually for addressing purposes). They can be disconnected/discontinuous. I wonder how many enthusiasts drivers actually follow “streets”, rather planned roads and assigned routes.
In Melbourne, there are many route=road that are not really numbered or coded road routes, but planned roads, or =street .
- The Princes Highway across the country includes Lonsdale St, Dandenong Rd, Queens Rd, etc, different named “streets” (if I understand their system correctly). https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/215662
- At first, Burke Rd might seem to be one named “street”. But it actually contains Burke Rd N, which would be considered a different “street” in addressing. Relation: Burke Road (8301125) | OpenStreetMap
- Hoddle Highway, and Hoddle Main Road, are apparently “not widely known to most drivers” Relation: Hoddle Highway (12592513) | OpenStreetMap
I had the thought that a planned road should be further distinguished aside from streets vs assigned routes. Rail has =tracks too besides =railway, although they are used for different purposes. Yes, this is a greater topic, but it would be a reason to keep route=street despite the “departure from proposal” / “non-proposal compliant”, for a more fundamental reason in the long run.
Btw I have OHM in mind as well. For handling change in named street sections, and evolving road developments.