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

Alex Mauer hawke at hawkesnest.net
Tue Oct 19 20:21:53 BST 2010


On 10/19/2010 02:06 PM, Anthony wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 2:59 PM, Alex Mauer<hawke at hawkesnest.net>  wrote:
>> On 10/18/2010 04:54 PM, Anthony wrote:
>>> First of all, the ref tags aren't valid.  The numbers are references
>>> of *routes*, not of *ways*.
> [snip]
>> You could equally say “the name tags aren’t valid; the names are references
>> of *streets*, not of *ways*”.
>
> I could, and I have, actually.

And I agree that street relations are a better option in the long run, 
if a little silly for the majority of cases where a street consists of a 
single way (and also a usability nightmare in editors).  But I also 
don’t think that removing the names from every way in the hopes that 
someone will notice the problem and fix the renderer would be the right 
way to go.  Same for ref tags.

>>  until we have something better we have to
>> live with it.
>
> In terms of routes, we do have something better.  Route relations.

We don’t have something better.  We have the *start* of something better.

>> Fix the renderers first.
>
> Don't tag for the renderer.

That’s not tagging for the renderer.  “Tagging for the renderer” would 
be if I wanted my fenceline to show up as a blue line at a low zoom 
level, so I might it highway=motorway.  That’s wrong.  Tagging something 
accurately, but also applying something which is not your pet schema, is 
not wrong, and is not “tagging for the renderer”.

No matter how much you may wish it were otherwise, part of the current 
standard system is to apply ref=* to the ways which make up the route. 
Once the route relation is better, I’m sure people will start using that 
instead, and stop using the current system.

—Alex Mauer “hawke”.




More information about the Talk-us mailing list