[Talk-us] National Forest refs/names
Paul Johnson
baloo at ursamundi.org
Wed Jul 29 23:12:31 UTC 2020
Could we get some examples of what you mean?
On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 5:26 PM <tj-osmwiki at lowsnr.net> wrote:
> That seems sensible. What about the general case (i.e. no continuity
> with a county road?) - to add "road" or not?
>
> On 2020/07/30 7:09, Paul Johnson wrote:
> > I'd generally include the whole name including "Road" in that case.
> >
> > On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 5:03 PM <tj-osmwiki at lowsnr.net
> > <mailto:tj-osmwiki at lowsnr.net>> wrote:
> >
> > Quick question for clarification.
> >
> > The US Forest Roads overlay in JOSM shows the name of forest roads
> > without "Road"; e.g. "Burton Creek B". Should the suffix "road" be
> added
> > or is it redundant and a waste of bytes? (Sometimes there may be
> > continuity from, say, a County Road with e.g. "Burton Creek Road",
> > though.)
> >
> > Mark.
> >
> > On 2020/07/30 2:55, Paul Johnson wrote:
> > > Alright, I think we have a consensus forming. Someone want to
> update
> > > the wiki?
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 12:30 PM Evin Fairchild
> > <evindfair at gmail.com <mailto:evindfair at gmail.com>
> > > <mailto:evindfair at gmail.com <mailto:evindfair at gmail.com>>> wrote:
> > >
> > > I'm also in favor of this change. It's a route number, so it
> only
> > > should be in the ref tag. This will make Forest service roads
> more
> > > consistent with other numbered routes. Even though most, if
> > not all,
> > > Forest service roads don't have a name but just a number, I
> > still am
> > > in favor of this. I was a bit surprised that the wiki was
> > saying to
> > > keep the road number in the name.
> > >
> > > In fact, the names that most of these forest service roads have
> > > don't even match common parlance. Most people refer to them as
> > > "Forest Service Road XX" whereas the TIGER import called them
> > > "National Forest Development Road XX," which might be the
> official
> > > name, but not the most common name.
> > >
> > > -Evin
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jul 29, 2020, 6:47 AM Mike Thompson
> > <miketho16 at gmail.com <mailto:miketho16 at gmail.com>
> > > <mailto:miketho16 at gmail.com <mailto:miketho16 at gmail.com>>>
> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, Jul 28, 2020 at 1:33 PM Paul Johnson
> > > <baloo at ursamundi.org <mailto:baloo at ursamundi.org>
> > <mailto:baloo at ursamundi.org <mailto:baloo at ursamundi.org>>> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Could we get the US Road Tagging page updated to
> reflect
> > > common name practice instead of encouraging the
> > duplication
> > > of the ref in the name? Or is that going to spark
> drama?
> > >
> > > I am in favor of the change. The name tag should be for
> the
> > > name only.
> > >
> > > Mike
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Talk-us mailing list
> > > Talk-us at openstreetmap.org
> > <mailto:Talk-us at openstreetmap.org> <mailto:Talk-us at openstreetmap.org
> > <mailto:Talk-us at openstreetmap.org>>
> > > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Talk-us mailing list
> > > Talk-us at openstreetmap.org <mailto:Talk-us at openstreetmap.org>
> > > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
> > >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Talk-us mailing list
> > Talk-us at openstreetmap.org <mailto:Talk-us at openstreetmap.org>
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Talk-us mailing list
> > Talk-us at openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20200729/466ec5a7/attachment.htm>
More information about the Talk-us
mailing list