[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 20:53:27 BST 2010

On 10/19/2010 02:37 PM, Anthony wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 3:21 PM, Alex Mauer<hawke at hawkesnest.net>  wrote:
>> 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.
> I certainly wouldn't recommend removing the names from the ways until
> you have the names in the relations.  At the point where you do, sure,
> they should be removed.  The idea that no one will ever create a
> renderer which uses the names in the relations is ludicrous.

Agreed, but that does us little good when we’re trying to make a map in 
the present, using the tools we have now.

> It would
> be trivial to write a preparser <snip explanation>

Sounds good.  Why hasn’t it been done, then?

>> 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.
> What about the route relation needs to be improved?

Renderer support, and a decision about how to handle mixed 
dual/single-carriageway roads. Should it be one relation per direction 
plus a super-relation, or one relation with roles? In either case, 
validator support needs improvement.

—Alex Mauer “hawke”

More information about the Talk-us mailing list