[Talk-us] Naming numbered roads as "State Route X", "Interstate X", etc.

Paul Johnson baloo at ursamundi.org
Sat Sep 1 03:38:21 UTC 2018

Yes, this is correct.  name=* is only the name.  Ideally, the ref=* tag
should be *supplemental* to a proper route relation at this point
(especially in Indiana, where I am aware of a *nine-way* concurrency,
something ref=* just doesn't handle very elegantly at all in even the
slightest stretch of the imagination.

On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 9:08 PM Albert Pundt <roadsguy99 at gmail.com> wrote:

> I notice the user SSR_317 has been adding the route numbers of unnamed
> roads to the name=* tag of roads around Indianapolis. For example, name=Interstate
> 465, name=US 31, name=State Route 37, etc. Isn't this practice frowned
> upon as being redundant and not reflecting the lack of a proper name to the
> road? This seems to be the case around the country. All route numbers were
> listed in alternate names of the roads in the original TIGER data, but the
> vast majority of these have been removed in favor of route relations and
> ref=* tags.
> I removed these name tags from the affected roads, but the user has since
> re-added them.
> —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/20180831/49f61e8f/attachment.html>

More information about the Talk-us mailing list