[Tagging] Route names that aren’t names

[Andy Townsend]

On 28/03/2020 19:16, Cascafico Giovanni wrote:
>
> Well, if somebody takes care of rendering [1] OSM data structure, 
> situation doesn't look so bad.
>
> [1] https://cycling.waymarkedtrails.org/#routelist?map=10!54.7983!-1.3075
>
  Not really - that's just ignoring names on the main map and showing 
superrelation names on the right in a separate legend. Try figuring out 
from 
https://cycling.waymarkedtrails.org/#routelist?map=11!53.1028!-0.8416 
which "NB" is which without using the mouseover highlight.

I ended up having to code specifically for the data (something you 
couldn't do internationally). 
https://github.com/SomeoneElseOSM/SomeoneElse-style/blob/master/style.lua#L6170 
means that at 
https://map.atownsend.org.uk/maps/map/map.html#zoom=14&lat=53.09613&lon=-0.9523 
route 645 just gets a ref but "National Byway (Southwell Loop)" gets a 
name, so that you can see at 
https://map.atownsend.org.uk/maps/map/map.html#zoom=15&lat=53.13343&lon=-0.84475 
which one is which.

Interestingly I'd say that 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1425019 is actually named 
correctly. although a quick look at the route suggests that the "phantom 
mergers" have been at it again. :(

Best Regards,

Andy