[Talk-us] "refs" describing routes instead of ways

[Paul Johnson]

On 12/14/2010 11:56 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote:

> Also note http://www.okladot.state.ok.us/hqdiv/p-r-div/maps/control-maps/tulsa3.pdf
> (inset 13) which has US 169 ending between the ramp and the overpass.

I'm wondering why we still are trying the whole "describe the route on
the way" method of handling the ref= tag on ways.  Very few roads in
Oklahoma lack refs that belong to the ways (as exemplified in the
control map above).  Using the ref= tag on the way to describe the
reference of the route that travels over it doesn't make much sense,
given that it takes the tag away from the way's ACTUAL reference number.
 Oregon has a similar situation with state and county roads, and pretty
much every bridge, so I'm lead to believe this is a problem for most
(all?) of the country.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 262 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/attachments/20101220/b9d68b3d/attachment.pgp>