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

[Paul Johnson]

On 12/22/2010 10:20 PM, Richard Welty wrote:
> On 12/22/10 10:32 PM, Paul Johnson wrote:
>> On 12/22/2010 08:45 PM, Richard Welty wrote:
>>> it may be that we want to
>>> evolve it, but just changing it without a plan and some level of
>>> agreement,
>>> and declaring that it's the renderers that are wrong, is a recipe mostly
>>> for ticking people off.
>> This is why I brought it up.
>>
> ok, fine. i think, myself, that we should leave the ref tag on the ways
> alone and discuss some alternative tagging for this style of reference
> tag.

Other than legacy issues that would need to be resolved, is there a
compelling reason to describe the route on something other than the
route?  I see this as a problem with consistency, but not one that is
insurmountable; notice how bicycle routes were once tagged on member
ways but have since been moved to relations, and no other entities get
described by tagging a completely different entity.

-------------- 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/20101223/5587b93a/attachment.pgp>