[Talk-us] State ref tags on ways: Use of unique ISO/ANSI/USPS 2-letter state codes in RELATIONS as well as WAYS?

[Richard Welty]

i've removed all prior text because i think it'll be a distraction.

we need to avoid jumbling rendering issues with data representation
issues. too many of us are focusing on how the rendered version looks
and not all data consumers are renderers.

the long term path will involve abandoning ref tags on the ways
in favor of ref tags on route relations. a lot of progress has been
made with this in the US, but there's lots more to do.
until we achieve that state we're stuck with ref tags on the ways.
there are a couple of issues there.

first, there isn't really a widely respected standard for what goes
in the ref tag. for too long, many have been focused on what looks
good when rendered in mapnik. some people who actively pronounce
"don't tag for the renderer" seem to have a blind spot about this
particular issue.

the problem with ref tags on ways is compounded when there
are multiple signed routes sharing a way. quick, what does this
ref tag mean:

ref=US 9; 20

does US apply to both? or is 20 a state route? (common tagging
in NJ, parts of PA, FL). what kind of sense is an automated parser
supposed to make of this? there certainly isn't any standard
interpretation defined in the wiki as far as i know.

we could muck around with the network tag on way to improve
the situation, but what i suspect is we're going to probably
fail to come to agreement on what might be doable with the ref
tag on the ways until it doesn't matter any more.

richard

-- 
rwelty at averillpark.net
 Averill Park Networking - GIS & IT Consulting
 OpenStreetMap - PostgreSQL - Linux
 Java - Web Applications - Search


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 946 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/attachments/20140313/5a31df7b/attachment.pgp>