[OSM-talk-be] Fietsknooppuntennetwerk/Cycle node network

[Ben Laenen]

On Wednesday 31 August 2011 16:09:54 Gerard Vanderveken wrote:
> That is OK for JOSM, but a list like this (at the bottom) is simply not
> meaningful.
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/9175555?relation_page=3

Then go complain to whoever is in charge of how that page is rendered?

> This is much clearer.
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/9132576
> altough  a short name would also do:
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/1641610
> The route name is not 'invented', everyone referr to it as the route
> from node A to node B
> So why not formalize it?

Because it's not its name. And because suddenly renderers have no idea whether 
they should render the name of a route or not. Or will you also invent another 
tag like 'show_name=no'?

Keep the database clean and don't sacrifice correct data for a little bit of 
legibility on a random webpage that for all we know may soon support showing 
the note tag.

Greetings
Ben