[Talk-us] US Interstate exit junction exit_to tag

[Alan Mintz]

At 2011-04-08 14:06, Mike N wrote:
>On 4/8/2011 1:16 PM, Alan Mintz wrote:
>
> >I would not be averse to something like:
> >
> >exit_to="CA-247 South"
> >
> >OR
> >
> >exit_to_root="CA-247"
> >exit_to_dir="South"
> >
> >Consumers that have evolved can use the second form if it is found, 
> or >the first if it is not. Older consumers can use the first form. 
> Users >that choose not to use the second form can use the first form and 
> it >will work with both old and new consumers.
>
>    The point of the most recent change was standardization - consumers 
> should not need to code 2 routines to handle both forms.

One "if" does not two routines make.


>   Our tagging guides should be as simple as possible.

Agreed. <sarcasm>Like turn restriction relations. And destination sign 
relations. And traffic camera relations.</sarcasm>


>    There is already a good 1 page on motorway_junction.   If a 
> non-programmer were to try to enter their information and saw a full 
> second page just to cover parsing rules, they would simply abandon their 
> efforts as too complicated.

If that were the case, I'd agree that a better solution should be found. Is 
it a full page? Not even close. Perhaps you were referring to my departure 
from the thread regarding semicolons, which is not at all specific to this 
group of tags?


>   (That already happens too often today with the existing OSM guidelines)

That is hardly the only reason.

--
Alan Mintz <Alan_Mintz+OSM at Earthlink.net>