[Talk-us] Highway Shield Rendering
phil_g at pobox.com
Tue Apr 3 22:27:15 BST 2012
* Chris Lawrence <lordsutch at gmail.com> [2012-04-03 15:15 -0400]:
> As NE2 correctly points out, the number may not be the best guide. VA
> secondaries are a lot more like CR systems in other states or the
> secondary system in Missouri, in that the numbering doesn't carry
> between counties/cities (e.g. there are probably almost* as many SR
> 600s as there are counties in the state). My tagging has been to use
> US:VA:secondary to avoid ambiguity, with separate relations for each
> distinct secondary using is_in:county for disambiguation.
Okay. If there aren't any strenuous objections from other Virginians on
the list, I'll go with US:VA:Secondary for the secondary routes and won't
render them if they're tagged US:VA.
> Finally, if you get bored, I wouldn't mind seeing a more "commercial
> map" style rendering option more akin to what Mapquest is doing - e.g.
> using the US and I shields but just circles/lozenges for the (primary)
> state routes and squares/rectangles for secondaries/CRs/Texas
> weirdness. After what you've done so far that will probably be
> child's play. :)
Yes, part of what we're doing here is seeing just how far we can go with
this approach, complete with all the one-off shields that roads around the
country use. I think that doing a proper commercial style will actually
require some additional tagging--I think we need a network_level tag akin
to the admin boundaries' admin_level so data consumers don't have to know
about every possible network value in every jurisdiction--and eventually
I'll get around to writing up a proposal if no one beats me to it.
...computer contrarian of the first order... / http://aperiodic.net/phil/
PGP: 026A27F2 print: D200 5BDB FC4B B24A 9248 9F7A 4322 2D22 026A 27F2
Absence is to love what wind is to fire. It extinguishes the small;
enkindles the great.
---- --- --
More information about the Talk-us