[OSM-talk] Relations not always brilliant

[Robert (Jamie) Munro]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Richard Fairhurst wrote:
| David Earl wrote:
|
|>>     In the UK, road numbers are unique (apart from about three cases
|>>     where local councils have cocked up, e.g. the B4027) and no
|>> road can
|>>     have more than one ref.
|> Not true - the A11 and A14 share about 10 miles of dual carriageway
|> around the north of Newmarket, for example.
|
| It's absolutely true. That bit's the A14. This Highways Agency
| document, for example, refers to the stretch of road in question as
| solely the A14:
|
|      http://www.highways.gov.uk/roads/15200.aspx
|
| The fact that traffic "following the A11" needs to use it is pretty
| much immaterial - traffic following the A34 from Winchester to
| Manchester, for example, has to use the M40 from Bicester to the M42,
| and no-one's suggesting that the M40 is also the A34 (if it is, I can
| cycle on it ;) ). No, it's the A14 leading to the A11, and will
| almost certainly be signposted as such - "A14 (A11)", or on more
| recent signs, on separate lines like this:

If that is the case, then the relationship is essential to convey the
route of the A11 information. If the road just has 2 numbers, then it
isn't - just a semi-colon in the ref would do.

Robert (Jamie) Munro
(who thinks that relationships are so brilliant that long term we
shouldn't tag ways at all - only relationships)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFH+WFIz+aYVHdncI0RAqmSAJ93U5F7F5K0lcnrfXKdDWzhNmdjqQCg92v2
h4SW72Wx7EwsBdLtbufpd30=
=lzzc
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----