[Talk-GB] Complaining about refs on roads again!

Derick Rethans osm at derickrethans.nl
Tue Apr 30 20:52:12 UTC 2013

On Tue, 30 Apr 2013, Andy Allan wrote:

> On 30 April 2013 19:21, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) <robert.whittaker+osm at gmail.com> wrote:

> > I would still maintain that it is appropriate to use the ref key for 
> > such reference numbers. Internal or not, it's still the primary 
> > official reference number for that stretch of road. I would argue 
> > that the "problem" with the numbers being displayed on the map is 
> > more of a rendering issue.
> I heartily disagree.
> There are clearly two "types" of road reference numbers used in the 
> UK. One type of reference is used publicly on signs, on atlases, and 
> people expect to see them. Another type is rarely seen by members of 
> the public, and of only very niche interest. They are different and we 
> should acknowledge this.
> It's very, very easy for us to say "For highways in the UK, only use 
> the ref tag for motorways, A and B roads". It's the principle of least 
> surprise - all around the world, people are using ref tags on highways 
> to show the reference that members of the public expect to see.
> It's only some high level of pedantry that would suggest there's no 
> difference between "A14" and "UW2093". Sure, it's possible to claim 
> it's a rendering issue, but in reality it's not. It's a 
> misinterpretation of what the ref tag, when used on highways, is for.
> I'd appreciate it if we can all accept the most sensible position, and 
> move these non-public references to a different, non-clashing tag.

I definitely agree with that!


More information about the Talk-GB mailing list