[Talk-us] Highway Tagging Consensus to Improve OSM (and address some of 41 latitude's concerns)

Nathan Edgars II neroute2 at gmail.com
Fri Oct 15 19:03:05 BST 2010

On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 1:47 PM, Phil! Gold <phil_g at pobox.com> wrote:
> Shield rendering has its own complications, though if it were implemented
> we could basically stop caring about the aesthetics of the ref= tags.  (If
> you had to use "US:UT 67" to get a shield, most people would do it that
> way.)  I personally think shields should be rendered from the route
> relations, but as I mentioned above, that seems a pipe dream at the
> moment.

Route relations may be a problem with county roads in some places.
Orange County, Florida, for example, has decided not to sign most
county roads anymore, leaving the existing signs to rot. They don't
seem to keep a list of which ones they do sign; it's probably up to
the individual engineer. The state, however, has its own ideas, and
marks county roads where they intersect state roads. It has an
inventory of county roads, but they don't always match what they sign
or what the county signs. So you'll sometimes have a county road
that's only signed at one end, and the other end of what used to be
signed may be a number of towns and turns away. The county no longer
considers it to be a numbered county road in any meaningful way, and
the state doesn't have jurisdiction to decide where a county road
goes. So the route has an indeterminate end.

I've been tagging these by choosing an arbitrary sensical point to
stop tagging the ref at. For example, here CR 439 is only signed at
the north end (on SR 50):
It used to continue south into Windermere, turn east on Conroy
Windermere Road, and south on Turkey Lake Road to SR 482. But this
hasn't been marked in over a decade, and isn't even all county
maintained anymore.

It seems to me that changing CR 439 to a relation would add a certain
level of validity to the south end.

More information about the Talk-us mailing list