[Talk-ca] Ref tags in Ontario

[James Mast]

I personally don't consider adding prefixes as 'tagging for the map'.  They are VERY useful for routers as well.  Plus, to be honest, there should be a way to easily identify what type a route is, especially when it changes between classifications, like {3} does several times.  Especially if {3} changes at an intersection to \3/ and you're coming into the intersection from the other road.  The router would then be able to announce the highway type for you so you can even verify via the shield that you're making the correct turn.

Us mappers in the USA have embraced them.  It allows people to notice with a quick glance what route type it is without having to dig deep into the data and find the relation.  I mean, to be honest, how would you be able figure out what type of route is which when you have the two different routes with the same number on the same segment, if the ref was just "ref=74;74" on the map? [1] (Blame the USA Congress for that one for getting it written into law.  I-74 there really should have been another number, like a southern I-79.)  Even countries in Europe are embracing the 'prefixes', where you see 'M' for Motorway, 'E' for Euro-routes, etc, when needed in OSM.

Honestly, I think Ontario should come out of the 'dark ages' and use prefixes as well, but I'm not going to go around spam adding the 'ON' to the ref tags and get blocked, because of it being against the CA communities wishes (at this time).

Also, if all (or at least most) of the Ontario editors would agree on adding the 'ON' to the ref, maybe MapQuest in their 'Open' maps would start rendering the BGS Ontario shield (would look better on the map because the number would be bigger than if using the standard stand-alone shields) on the map for those routes, just like they have done for all of the US state highways. [2]  They base the rendering of shields off of the 'ref' tag, not relations, mainly because most states don't have all of their relations done yet either (all US highways and Interstates in all states are already done).

-James

[1] - https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/48876018 
[2] - https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=15/40.7927/-80.1367&layers=Q 

> Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2015 22:00:59 -0400
> From: scruss at gmail.com
> To: talk-ca at openstreetmap.org
> Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] Ref tags in Ontario
> 
> Hi Kevin
> 
> > Andrewpmk (almost entirely him) and I reversed all of the ON prefixes
> > to the 400-Series highways
> 
> Many thanks to you both for doing that.
> 
> > Personally I don't think there should be any prefix for rendering or
> > navigation purposes, but I guess it depends on whether you think
> > county or regional road prefixes should be there for navigation or
> > rendering purposes.
> 
> Prefixes are definitely 'tagging for the map', so shouldn't happen,
> IMBO. Ontario's got a fairly robust boundary, so the relations should
> sort out what road is in what province.
> 
> cheers
>  Stewart
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-ca mailing list
> Talk-ca at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
 		 	   		  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ca/attachments/20150627/5441e06c/attachment-0001.html>