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

Ian Dees ian.dees at gmail.com
Fri Oct 15 21:55:36 BST 2010


On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 12:10 PM, Dale Puch <dale.puch at gmail.com> wrote:

> >> == "Inconsistent State Prefixes" ==
>
> I wish there was a better (simpler) way to consistently tag the state and
> county shields but I do not have one.  I think it needs to be done though.
> Compared to the rest of the world, I think the US has an extra layer of 50
> varying standards to deal with.
>
> I would add to Val's e-mail that county roads might need the same
> US:UT:CR-14 as I believe they are handled differently in some state as
> well.  Also to differentiate them from tags from other parts of the world.
>
>
Why are we trying to shove all this information into the ref=* tag? What
I've done in the past is make route relations.

If I'm working on US Route 45 I create a relation tagged like so:
  type=route
  route=road
  network=US:US
  ref=45

If I'm working on WI state road 29 I create a relation tagged like so:
  type=route
  route=road
  network=US:WI
  ref=29

and for county road HHH:
  type=route
  route=road
  network=US:WI:CO
  ref=HHH

I think we could discuss what belongs in the "network" tag but I don't think
the "ref" tag should contain anything other than the actual numeric or
alphanumeric reference of the road. No "CR" or "SR" or acronym for the
human-name of the road.

The fact that the renderers don't show the route relations nicely right now
is a separate issue that we probably need to deal with by rendering a
US-specific set of tiles.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/attachments/20101015/01b2d256/attachment.html>


More information about the Talk-us mailing list