[Talk-us] [Warning: Potential Flamewar] Clarifying InterstateRelations
rwelty at averillpark.net
Mon Feb 8 23:30:27 GMT 2010
On 2/8/10 5:57 PM, Apollinaris Schoell wrote:
> quite. the format for ref in relations is very clear, for example
> Don't think this is clear. US:I is wrong, the network is only I. Any
> consumer application can figure out that it is in US by itself. as an
> example mkgmap currently supports custom shields and does it based on
> the way refs. But with US:I an application has to filter the US:
> specifically for this kind of network which isn't used anywhere else.
> if you think the state, country info is needed as a tag use is_in or
> an addr:* tag
> combining different values in a single tag makes it too complicated to
> consume data.
there is a major disconnect between what people think is "right" and
what the wiki calls for. from
network=US:I, US:I:BUSINESS, US:I:DOWNTOWN, US:I:FUTURE Required.
Business, downtown and future routes have their own signage
ref=* Required. ex. 90
and many people have been busy building relations to fit this specification.
ref=* ex. 20
and so forth.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Talk-us