[Talk-us] Usage of exit_to

[Paul Norman]

On 2014-07-03 7:13 PM, Bill R. WASHBURN wrote:
> I like how clearly you explain the differences. Since destination= is 
> so much more intuitive and so much more widely used, should we 
> depreciate exit_to, indicate on the wiki that exit_to is depreciated, 
> and make a concerted effort to migrate exit_to exits to destination= 
> exits?
>
> I'm not sure how this migration would be anything other than a manual 
> process since we're moving from route numbers to destination names.
Well, in the case of a simple offramp it'll be the same information - 
whatever is on the sign.

I believe some exit_to information was added without reference to any 
form of ground truth but based on external sources, so checking the data 
would probably be a good idea.

> Here's a question (after a little explanation): in the example in your 
> diary entry, it appears that exit 91 splits into A and B after leaving 
> the motorway both from the east and west directions. It also appears 
> that the northbound ramps join together before merging with the 
> northbound motorway. The question is, would it be better to 
> add 180104293 to two relations for the northbound and southbound 
> destination= tags

There aren't any relations involved here.