[Talk-us] Interstate Highways Relations List

[Richard Weait]

On Sun, 2009-04-12 at 20:26 -0400, Greg Troxel wrote:
> Paul Johnson <baloo at ursamundi.org> writes:
> 
> > Why make this more complicated than it has to be?  Leave the names on
> > the underlying way, not the relations; leave the refs on the relations,
> > not the underlying ways.  Then it's a matter of fixing mapnik and t at h to
> > do the right thing, since relations are set up better to handle things
> > like route symbols.
> 
> I don't follow why you think the name belongs on the way.  I would think
> that if there was a named road in a state that should be relation, and
> that relation a member of the interstate relation for the state, and
> that a member of the entire interstate relation.  The key property to be
> supported is arbitrarily nested relations.

I like names and refs where they make the most sense.  If we get full
(super-) relation support we have many options that work when they are
right for the situation.  

> > I'm not logged in on the wiki right now to fix this on the relations
> > list page, but we should probably recommend including a URL to a freely
> > reproducible SVG of the route marker so someone has the motivation to
> > fix rendering of numbered highways to use refs on relations in addition
> > to (or better yet: instead of) underlying ways, they can render
> > something other than the fugly ref symbols currently used, and instead
> > use the same symbol used along the actual route.
> 
> I don't see why symbol source is related to whether the ref is on a
> relation or a way.  But I agree that having symbols someplace where all
> renderers can get at them would be nice.

I made mine from wikimedia stock.  I think they still need some fussing
and attention to get them right.  Perhaps a script will do better.