[Talk-us] Thoughts on a standard "ref" abbreviation for PA Turnpike?

Bryan Housel bhousel at gmail.com
Sun Nov 11 13:32:27 UTC 2018

Sounds good to me - I think the PATP abbreviation is easy to understand. 

Thanks, Bryan 

Sent from my iPhone

> On Nov 10, 2018, at 7:50 PM, Albert Pundt <roadsguy99 at gmail.com> wrote:
> Does anyone object to the use of "PATP" as the ref equivalent for the PA Turnpike? Particularly for destination:ref tags, as the Turnpike keystone shield is used on most guide signs for ramps onto the Turnpike. However, since it's not used as a reassurance marker*, I don't think it should be added as a ref tag on the ways (i.e. ref=I 76;PATP) as is done on the New Jersey Turnpike, which does have its shield on pull-through signs and similar.
> This sort of abbreviation is already standard practice in New Jersey (for the NJTP, GSP, and ACE) and New York (all the parkways), which have standard shields used on guide signs.
> This would apply to the mainline (I-76 and I-276) and the Northeast Extension (I-476), but not the newer four extensions (PA Tpke 43, 66, 576, and I-376).
> *There is now one set of signs eastbound on the mainline PA Turnpike approaching the Willow Grove (PA 611) interchange that has the PA Turnpike shield on the pull-through side. However, this was put up within the past two months and is not nearly common enough to base system-wide practice on.
> —Albert Pundt
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/attachments/20181111/8474d0a9/attachment.html>

More information about the Talk-us mailing list