baloo at ursamundi.org
Sun Oct 8 22:57:54 UTC 2017
On Sun, Oct 8, 2017 at 5:33 PM, Greg Troxel <gdt at lexort.com> wrote:
> Kevin Kenny <kevin.b.kenny+osm at gmail.com> writes:
> > Perhaps we could reach consensus more easily if we were
> > to first try to agree that the goal is to tag both physical character
> > and regional importance, and recognize that the two serve
> > different needs, and are (in the US) often grossly mismatched?
> > Then the discussion could revolve around the question of what
> > tagging is for physical character, what tagging is for regional
> > significance, and what are objective criteria for assessing
> > significance. (It's somewhat subjective, and therefore
> > contrary to the OSM spirit of "tag what is visible only on the
> > ground", but it's so necessary to getting mapping and routing
> > right that I think we have to grasp that particular bull by
> > the horns.)
> I think that would be a great step forward.
> The elephant in the room, though, is that the behavior of the default
> render is considered extremely important, and I think a lot of the
> debate is at least somewhat tied to controlling how that comes out.
Not sure where my previous reply in the thread went. I'm wondering if
there's another tag that's in common with this situation? That way the
highway tag can just deal with whether the way is some sort of surface road
or if it's an expressway or if it's a freeway.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Talk-us