[Tagging] Proposal: Use description instead of name for route relations

[Mateusz Konieczny]

Oct 18, 2023, 09:30 by 61sundowner at gmail.com:

>
>
>
> On 17/10/23 23:22, Paul Johnson wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 17, 2023 at            4:51 AM Warin <>> 61sundowner at gmail.com>> >            wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 17/10/23 04:17, Paul Johnson wrote:
>>>
>>>> Presently, it's common for route                  relations to have names that violate "name is only the                  name" and "name is not ref" and "name is not                  description" rules for name=* tags.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I don't find it common in 'my area' of mapping. One or                two examples would demonstrate the situation?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> In any case:
>>>
>>>
>>> The name tag is used on may things for example;                buildings, parks, schools, highways ... 
>>>
>>>
>>> The use of the name tag as 'name only' applies where                ever the name tag is used. This is similar for other                tags such as elevation, width, colour etc. No matter                what feature they are used on the tags carry the same                characteristics and restrictions. It is not necessary to                repeat these characteristics and restrictions for every                main feature.
>>>
>>>
>> Routes have names, too!  For example, here's the relation            for OK 51, named for the name of the route.  >> https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/3108562
>>
>> Meanwhile, I 40 in Arkansas has a good example of a name            that is actually a ref and a description, not a name.  >> https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/6843700
>>
>>  Finally, OK 19 is an example of a properly described            no-name route.  >> https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/7479405
>>
>
>
>
>
> Ok. I still don't see a necessity of repeating the name tag      information inside the relation tag...
>
>
this proposal wants to remove wrong advise that advocates adding fake names to
relations

maybe just removing this bad advise without proposal would be a good idea
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20231018/ac8dce67/attachment-0001.htm>