[Tagging] Misuse of name tag for route description

[Mateusz Konieczny]

Currently description of route is recommended to be mapped in name tag.

It clearly should be placed in description tag, with name tag used for a name of the route.

I plan on amending Wiki this way, despite that proposal recommended misuses of name tag.

Please comment if such edit would not advisable in your opinion.

10 May 2019, 12:07 by selfishseahorse at gmail.com:

> Regarding the recent changes (from 6 May 2019‎) to the wiki page
> "Public transport" about the misuse of the name tag for route
> descriptions (e.g. name="701: Samedan Bahnhof - Le Prese Stazione").
> [1]
>
> [1]: > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Public_transport&action=history <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Public_transport&action=history>
>
> I agree that the route description (from - to) is not its name. By the
> way, the same problem also affects hiking routes. I must admit that
> i've also misued the name=* tag this way. The reason are the editors:
> if a route is only tagged with ref=*, from=*, to=* (and description=*)
> and if more than one route variant or direction uses the same
> highway=*, one loses track of the routes and it becomes almost
> impossible to maintain them because editors only display the ref=*
> value in the relations list (e.g. there were multiple "13").
>
> I think it were be the best if editors would also display from=* and
> to* (or, instead, description=*) if there is no name=tag, in order
> that the name=* tag can be kept for routes that really have a name=*
> (e.g. Via Alpina).
>
> (I'm sending this email to the tagging mailing list as it doesn't only
> concern public transportation routes.)
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20190510/8dffa91a/attachment.html>