[Talk-us] [Warning: Potential Flamewar] Clarifying InterstateRelations

Richard Welty rwelty at averillpark.net
Mon Feb 8 19:53:39 GMT 2010


On 2/8/10 2:34 PM, Mike N. wrote:
>
>> Third, I consider a reference containing just the number to be
>> incomplete.  IMHO, the ref tag should contain the complete designation
>> of a piece of highway.  This also makes it easier to search for this.
>>      
>    To search, just search for both the network and route tags.  It's just as
> though the information was placed in separate database columns.
>    
quite. the format for ref in relations is very clear, for example

network=US:I
ref=95

take the tail of the network (after the last :) and the ref, and you 
have your
designation for shield purposes: "I 95" this is a pretty trivial 
construction
process, and it works for everyplace the network tag is correctly set. 
if the
shield info is available, then fetch the shield using the appropriate method
(probably with a generic shield available based on the network as a 
fallback)
and superimpose the ref.

where it gets interesting is with certain named parkways (common around
NYC). i've been setting the ref tags for those to their initials (e.g., 
TSP for
Taconic State Parkway). a typical shield for such a parkway looks like this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Taconic_State_Pkwy_Shield.svg

i'm inclined to think the initials are an adequate solution. but others 
might
disagree...

richard





More information about the Talk-us mailing list