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

Phil! Gold phil_g at pobox.com
Sat Oct 23 17:43:09 BST 2010

* Val Kartchner <val42k at gmail.com> [2010-10-18 22:49 -0600]:
> On Fri, 2010-10-15 at 14:25 -0400, Phil! Gold wrote:
> > [...]  Instead, I would treat it as a road that needed a
> > custom shield, if any shield was rendered at all.  I'll note that Google,
> > Bing, and Mapquest all appear to have punted on this; none of them renders
> > any shield at all on it.
> Why should we consider the big map providers a ceiling as to what Open
> Street Map should be?  Why don't we consider these providers as a
> minimum goal?

I mentioned them as a point of reference, simply because a) they have
people whose job it is to make the maps "good", and b) those maps are
easily accessible to anyone on the Internet.  I think that there are
definitely opportunies to do a better job than they do with their maps.
If, however, there's something that they all do in the same way, I think
we should ask why that is.  They may have a good reason.  :)

In this particular instance, I suspect that they all decided that highway
shields were for route numbers on top of network-standard shields.  Since
these highways don't have standard shields and don't have signed route
numbers, they didn't fit with the rest of the road renderings.  I think
that picking prominent letters off the signs as the ref= for the road,
particularly with our current rendering, is a very mixed bag.  On the one
hand, it does kind of match the signs.  On the other hand, very few people
who aren't already familiar with the roads in question will understand
what the map means and will just be confused.  That's why I think that the
roads should either have rendered shields that match their signs or no
shields (just the road names, which are always there).

...computer contrarian of the first order... / http://aperiodic.net/phil/
PGP: 026A27F2  print: D200 5BDB FC4B B24A 9248  9F7A 4322 2D22 026A 27F2
--- --
If you want to program in C, program in C.  It's a nice language.  I use
it occasionally...  :-)
                       -- Larry Wall
---- --- --

More information about the Talk-us mailing list