[OpenStreetMap talk-lu] Reference format (Was: Meeting 2012)

[Tristan Schmurr]

Hello again!

I actually discussed about it with Stereo and told him that N1 was nice,
but VdLE9 wouldn't. I think the space would avoid any confusion without
making it too long.

So I agree Loll78 and Frank.

Have a great evening ;-)

Tristan/kewl

On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 10:05:31PM +0200, Loll wrote:
> Hi everyone.
> 
> Concerning the reference format of the streets I'm more for "CR 200" 
> because it is not only more convenient to read and it gets the 
> possibility to extract additional information from it. This additional 
> information is not needed (because the information is already tagged 
> with highway = secondary) but it permits to double-check it.
> So my general proposal for the road references, as Frank already 
> suggested, would be:
> No "dots" and a space between characters and numbers.
> 
> This notation can also be used for many other objects. However one 
> should have the same notation style for the same kind of objects (bus 
> lines (VdL, TICE, ...) , bicycle (PC, ...) etc...
> 
> A+
> Loll78/Laurent
> 
> 
> Frank Broniewski said the following on 05/06/2012 08:29:
> > HI,
> >
> > this seems really a difficult thing to be. I had a look at our Topo 
> > maps, scales 1:5.000 and 1:20.000, they use the "C.R. 200" naming 
> > scheme. The BDTopo (2001) follows this scheme also. I also had a look 
> > while driving home and road signs tended to use the "CR 200" scheme 
> > for the road itself, and in combination with driving directions the 
> > "CR" is omitted.
> >
> > From the map rendering view I'd like to have a space between "CR" and 
> > the number, just for a better readability of road signs. AFAIK there's 
> > no possibility to manipulate text with mapnik. But I know, we don't 
> > map for the renderer. Nevertheless, personally I prefer a version with 
> > a space between "CR" and the number. IMO the abbreveation points do 
> > not carry any useful information, so those could be omitted.
> >
> > Just my 2 cents,
> >
> > Frank
> >
> >
> > Am 04.06.2012 15:08, schrieb Guillaume Rischard:
> >> On 7 May 2012, at 09:10, Pierre Carier wrote:
> >>
> >>> discussion about tagging, name:lb or alt_name:, or CR 110 and C.R. 
> >>> 110 (for example)
> >>
> >> About references:
> >>
> >> We seem to have three competing ways of writing those references: 
> >> CR102 CR 102 and C.R. 102.
> >>
> >> I'm proposing standardising on the CR102 format, no spaces, no full 
> >> stops. It is compatible with the Ponts et Chaussées and Wikipedia, 
> >> and the other syntaxes add no information.
> >>
> >> Here is an inventory of all the ref values we have in Luxembourg: 
> >> http://pastie.textmate.org/4025170
> >>
> >> References I will standardise if everyone is ok are A, B on this side 
> >> of the German border, CFL, CR, E, N, PC and VDL. We can then compare 
> >> "our" list with 
> >> http://www.pch.public.lu/reseau_routier/reseau_routier.pdf.
> >>
> >> In my inventory, there are also references like "Cul de Sac", "Roman 
> >> Road" or "Condition bad". Anyone should feel free to clean those up.
> >>
> >> What do you think?
> >>
> >> Guillamue
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> talk-lu mailing list
> >> talk-lu at openstreetmap.org
> >> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-lu
> >
> >
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> talk-lu mailing list
> talk-lu at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-lu

-- 
I used to have an open mind but my brains kept falling out.