[Talk-us] Interstate Highways Relations List

[Zeke Farwell]

*Joseph Jon Booker* said:

My approach (and I don't know if you'll agree with this) is to consider"Pacific
Highway" something independent of I-5 or Oregon 99. Pacific Highway is more
like its own designation for a highway, and ways which belong to both I-5
and Pacific Highway (or Oregon 99 and Pacific Highway) are treated like any
other co-signed highways: just by addingthe affected ways to the relations
for each highway.


I agree with Joseph.  Unless a road is one unbroken way in the OSM database,
the name tag doesn't belong on the ways themselves.  It belongs on a
relation containing all the ways.  This tagging method is very flexible and
can handle all of the situations mentioned in this conversation.


Richard Weait said:

> I'm beginning to think that only local mechanical tags should be on the way.
>  Like a bridge, basic road construction, number of lanes.
>  Anything repetitive should be promoted to the next relation up.


I also think this statement is right on.  Lately I've been cleaning up the
interstates in my area, and I've been very careful to remove the name and
ref tags from each short way I create for a bridge.  If I did not, the map
of that highway would have way too many duplicate names and ref badges all
over it.

It would be much better if none of the ways making up said interstate had
name or ref tags and that data was only in relations.  Then based on the
total length of the ways in the relation, and the zoom level of the map a
renderer can figure out where to draw the name and ref badge (hopefully a
shield in the future!)

Zeke Farwell
Burlington, VT
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/attachments/20090413/709c8525/attachment.html>