[Talk-us] Future Interstate Relations

Phil! Gold phil_g at pobox.com
Wed Jul 10 20:02:49 UTC 2013

* Paul Johnson <baloo at ursamundi.org> [2013-07-10 10:16 -0500]:
> I don't think we hit a consensus, did we?  Seems like we were talking
> about whether having a modifier tag or not, and if not, including the
> banner in the network.

As I documented at
, I think there's definitely a consensus around putting the banner in the

> I don't recall anybody proposing doing both (which seems redundant on
> multiple levels).

I don't recall a specific discussion about whether to use the modifier tag
with the banner already in the network tag, but the wiki (at
) implies that the modifier tag should duplicate the banner present
elsewhere, and I've seen the practice in OSM data (from at least NE2, but
I'm reasonably sure I've seen other people tagging in this way, too).

Separately from the practice that I've seen, I think that having the
modifer separate as well as in the network tag allows data consumers to
easily work back to the "root" network while still preserving the
uniqueness constraints for consumers that only process the network and ref

More information about the Talk-us mailing list