[Tagging] Destination tagging of motorway links

[Greg Troxel]

Dave Swarthout <daveswarthout at gmail.com> writes:

> To reiterate my position — I can alter my compilation code for my Garmin-
> compatible maps to prefer destination:ref over the plain ref tag. That's
> not the issue here. I don't believe it's correct to add a ref tag to an
> unsigned way, especially a freeway exit ramp. Logan airport service roads
> may indeed have legitimate refs and that's perfectly fine. These are exit
> ramps for Exit 49 — they do not have standalone refs either signed or
> unsigned.

> Also, it isn't just my routing code that's misunderstanding the tagging of
> this interchange. OSMAnd displays the identical message when approaching
> Exit 49. Do you think it's a good idea to request that both me and OSMAnd
> make special allowances for this tagging scenario?

It's a fair point that multiple independent routers interpreting things
this way is a clue that it is established practice.

> I want to remove the references but I anticipate some blowback from the
> original mapper. That's the reason I put it out for other mappers to
> consider.

(By the Logan example, I meant that such roads having refs was
exceptional.)

I didn't mean to say you are wrong.  Your argument makes perfect sense,
and I believe the ref= should be removed on normal exit ramps, when it's
not the ref for the ramp.