[OSM-talk] Using destination_sign relations for complex exit ramps?

[Roy Wallace]

On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 11:08 PM, Konrad Skeri <konrad at skeri.com> wrote:
>
> In your case you would get 3 relations. I-70 to exit 91 (with
> destination= according to the sign at I-70), exit 91 to exit 91A, and
> exit 91 to exit 91B (with destination= accoring to the sign(s) at exit
> 91 before the 91A/B fork).

It may be just me, but using type=destination_sign + ref=91 seems to
imply that "91" is a property of the sign.

Doesn't an "exit" exist independently of the sign? If so, is there a
way to map it independently of a destination_sign?