[Talk-ca] Route reference tagging: time for change?

[James]

I agree with Pierre and Jarek. During our previous discussions we clearly
indicated we do not want prefixes.

Numbers (integers) are much easier and simpler to parse than a string of
characters.

RR7, ON7, RR 7, ON 7?
No.
7

Network tag is the functionality that you desire

I'm not advocating tagging for the rederrer, I'm just saying the data
itself is easier to parse.

On Sun., Jul. 4, 2021, 3:41 p.m. Daniel @jfd553, <jfd553 at hotmail.com> wrote:

> Pierre et Jarek +1
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jarek Piórkowski [mailto:jarek at piorkowski.ca]
> Sent: Sunday, July 04, 2021 14:45
> To: talk-ca at openstreetmap.org
> Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] Route reference tagging: time for change?
>
> On Sun, 4 Jul 2021 at 12:23, Andrew Deng via Talk-ca
> <talk-ca at openstreetmap.org> wrote:
> > I agree with the proposal. It makes it easier to identify which routes
> are provincially-owned, which are regional/county roads, and which ones are
> municipal. For example, with the current no-prefix tagging, one would have
> no idea that York Regional Road 7 in Markham becomes Ontario Highway 7 east
> of Reesor Road, and a person would have to look online to websites such as
> https://thekingshighway.ca/ in order to accurately determine where the
> provincial part of the highway starts.
>
> Actually we have this data in OSM, in machine-readable `network` tags
> in route relations. York's Highway 7 is
> https://osm.org/relation/4426016 with network=CA:ON:York while the
> provincial part is https://osm.org/relation/2203858 with
> network=CA:ON:primary.
>
> (Incidentally, the `network` tag also allows OSM users to distinguish
> between municipal and provincial freeways, for example QEW as
> CA:ON:primary https://osm.org/relation/102331 vs Gardiner as
> CA:ON:Toronto:Expressway https://osm.org/relation/109578.)
>
> It is true that this is not rendered on the default openstreetmap.org
> map layer, but changing tags to get rendering on any one renderer is
> generally discouraged in OSM. On the flip side, this `network` tag
> actually contains more information than an "RR" in ref would have -
> for example, a specialized renderer could show shields for York
> (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:York_Regional_Road_7.svg)
> differently from shields for Niagara (network=CA:ON:Niagara resulting
> in a shield like
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Niagara_Regional_Road_20.svg)
>
> > As for the prefix not being on the signs, US Route signs also do not
> have US- prefix on their shields, nor do many state route shields either.
> So I don't understand the argument there.
>
> There is a counter argument that perhaps routes in the USA shouldn't
> have prefixes either - since they're not signed, and, you know, for
> consistency with Canada ;)
>
> > To answer the one about Hamilton: I know that Sudbury refers to theirs
> as "Municipal Road X", so perhaps that would be the same with Hamilton?
>
> Actually most numbered routes in Hamilton follow named roads (like
> King Street, Main Street), and where they don't, the road is often
> still named like simply "Highway 8". For an example, check out route
> 65 near their southern border https://osm.org/relation/4137034 (the
> history of that relation might also be interesting for those wanting
> to find an abbreviation for Hamilton roads, but you'll probably want
> to find a verifiable source).
>
> As another example, Oxford County in Ontario is legally a regional
> municipality, should their roads be prefixed CR or RR? Who can verify
> all of these?
>
> --Jarek
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-ca mailing list
> Talk-ca at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20210704/3e93a10d/attachment.htm>