[Tagging] road names and refs

Warin 61sundowner at gmail.com
Thu Jan 30 22:51:15 UTC 2020


old_name=Old Route 7 ... perhaps this should more correctly be old_name=Route 7

If it does not appear on signs but locals refer to it as such then

local_name=Old Route 7

And then add 'comment=local name is used verbally, not on signs as yet.'

???


On 31/1/20 9:22 am, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
>>> Are we agreed that something like "Old Route 7" has become a name?
>>   I'd generally suggest tagging that as  noname=yes old_ref=US 7
> I find that strange. It's no longer a ref. It won't have a "US 7" sign
> anywhere on it, because it is not part of "US 7".
>
> How would a map renderer label this with a ref "shield", especially if
> the language is not English?
>
> The road system in the USA is not always sensible enough to fit in a box.


There are many things that don't fit in OSM, either they are not meant to be fitted or there is probably some obscure tag that is what your after.

>
> - Joseph Eisenberg
>
> On 1/31/20, Paul Johnson <baloo at ursamundi.org> wrote:
>> On Thu, Jan 30, 2020 at 3:15 PM Kevin Kenny <kevin.b.kenny at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, Jan 30, 2020 at 2:50 PM Richard Fairhurst <richard at systemed.net>
>>> wrote:
>>>> Honestly, there is, and it's as Paul and I have described - you put the
>>> ref
>>>> in the ref tag and leave the name tag blank. This is how it has been in
>>> OSM
>>>> since pretty much day one. If a newbie in Europe puts a ref in the name
>>> tag,
>>>> it gets stomped on pretty quickly.
>>>>
>>>> The reason it might seem otherwise in the States is that the TIGER
>>>> import
>>>> didn't populate the ref tag, just the name tag, and a lot of the TIGER
>>>> import still hasn't been cleared up. So there's a bunch of
>>>> TIGER-derived
>>>> roads which have things like "name=County Road 23" (or Township Road,
>>>> or
>>> "Co
>>>> Rd", or many other variations).
>>> OK, I'll add that to the things I look for. As I said, I'd been
>>> retaining it only when it's the only name, and I never added any new
>>> ways with that, merely refrained from repairing that case.
>>>
>>> It's encouraging that in this particular discussion, that's the only
>>> detail you guys say I got wrong. 'ref' tag on the way for the
>>> renderer; road route relation with detailed network and ref; never an
>>> alt_name or name_1, etc. with a route reference.
>>>
>>> Oh, and a further corner case: Are we agreed that something like "Old
>>> Route 7" has become a name?  It's no longer a ref, because Route 7 is
>>> now elsewhere. It appears on street signs like any other name, not on
>>> a reference banner, and it's the 'addr:street' of the houses on it.
>>>
>> Eeeh, I'd generally suggest tagging that as noname=yes old_ref=US 7 (if the
>> old route was a US route) to retain more information.  Signing is pretty
>> similar, too, some places will leave the old shields up and change the
>> banner from a cardinal to OLD until the signs wear out as a wayfinder for
>> folks with outdated maps.  Much of the midwest, on nameless roads that have
>> routes, just put something like "SH 33" or "Hwy 412" on the finger signs as
>> a low-budget solution to posting a proper, potentially multicolor, die-cut,
>> screen-printed shield and a double-ended arrow as is MUTCD standard for
>> such a case.  addr:street still goes with however the post finds it.  It
>> helps to know the local context quite a bit when trying to sort out how
>> local authorities cheaped out on posting standard signs.
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20200131/f7e33ea6/attachment-0001.htm>


More information about the Tagging mailing list