<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><br class="">
<div><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On Nov 20, 2021, at 4:01 PM, Paul Johnson <<a href="mailto:baloo@ursamundi.org" class="">baloo@ursamundi.org</a>> wrote:</div><div class=""><div dir="ltr" class=""><div dir="ltr" class=""><br class=""></div><div class="gmail_quote"><div class="">Expansions like this are usually handled in the description field of a road route relation. Why not name? Sometimes routes are named and/or numbered. Creek Turnpike would be an example of a named route, it having OK 365 as a ref is a relatively recent update. Or OK 51, the 42nd Rainbow Infantry Division Highway (or something like that). It's also a named route. But most route relations have descriptions that often match a reasonable expansion (though this can't be gauranteed, perhaps we need ref:stylized as a hint to consumers; example, <font face="monospace" class="">ref:stylized=State Highway 51</font>.</div></div></div></div></blockquote></div><br class=""><div class="">The creation of a ref:stylized=* tag is an interesting idea. I think that would fit the situation I see in some rural areas where there is no obvious name on state highways.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div></body></html>