[Talk-us] [Talk-ca] "Highway X" and the like as names

[Brian M. Sperlongano]

Greetings from south of the border, and also cross-posting to the talk-us
list.  This is a topic we've been debating recently and it's fairly
inconclusive.  We've discovered that there are some cases where most people
agree that making redundant names is wrong (example: name=Interstate 95).
There are other cases where there's state and county routes where the
highway spelled out with route numbers is used in street signs and postal
addressing with no other name, where there are very good arguments for
having e.g. "State Highway 15" in the name tag of ways.  So I don't think
that we've established any particular rule or consensus in the US on this
topic and there's a fair amount of disagreement about where to draw the
line..

On Wed, Jan 19, 2022 at 5:49 PM Jherome Miguel <jheromemiguel at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Should we be removing or replacing "Highway x" and the like names as
> redundant with highway number (tagged ref=), as like what is already being
> done south of the border? I've done this with roads in Alberta, either
> removing them or replacing them with range/township road numbers where
> posted (in provinces that follow Dominion land system) or other posted road
> names, or route names as found in trailblazer signs, but some of those
> "names" got restored.
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-ca mailing list
> Talk-ca at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/attachments/20220119/f5551fcc/attachment.htm>