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

Richard Welty rwelty at averillpark.net
Wed Dec 22 20:53:43 GMT 2010



On 12/22/10 2:22 AM, Paul Johnson wrote:

rather than get into detailed back-and-forth, i'm going to suggest a 
framework
for deciding when it's appropriate to put something in a ref tag.

1) ref tags tend to get rendered at some zoom level. for mapnik or 
osmarender,
there may be some decluttering going on, tags may not be rendered until a
certain zoom level, or some ref tags may be selectively omitted.  will 
including
these detailed reference tags cause a clutter problem.

2) likewise, ref tags may get included in the text banner at the top of (for
example) a garmin display. again, will this be helpful to the end user 
or confusing
to the end user.

3) routing algorithms may choose to include ref tag info in the 
directions they
generate. same comment as 2 applies here. did the info help or hurt?

these signs may be visible, but is having 169-72-83 instead of US 169 in
a ref tag really an improvement? i should think not.

and yes, getting refs from relations would preferable, but we're a long 
way from
that. while we shouldn't be "tagging incorrectly for the render", we can 
certainly,
right this minute, do things with ref tags that hurt rather than help 
given the
current rendering/routing environment. don't make things worse now in 
the name
of "not tagging for the renderer". this is a common sense thing.
> On 12/20/2010 03:19 PM, Richard Welty wrote:
>
>> if so, it's reasonable to use them in ref tags. if not, then they should
>> not go in ref tags. most renderers will display them on the assumption that
>> there is some real signage displaying them; this will only confuse users. i
>> have in the past pondered whether we need something like
>>
>> ref_admin:state=
>> ref_admin:county=
>>
>> for these types of admin tags (NY and various NY counties have them
>> as well.)
> To me, that seems like a band-aid to the real problem, and that's trying
> to describe attributes of a relation on a way instead of in the relation...
the idea was that some tag like this could be used on relations as well 
as ways,
just as we currently have ref for both relations and ways. i don't 
recall being
that specific about which would get a tag like this.

richard




More information about the Talk-us mailing list