On 20/10/23 10:32, Paul Johnson wrote:
On Wed, Oct 18, 2023 at 2:31 AM Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
On 17/10/23 23:22, Paul Johnson wrote:
On Tue, Oct 17, 2023 at 4:51 AM Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
On 17/10/23 04:17, Paul Johnson wrote:
Presently, it's common for route relations to have names
that violate "name is only the name" and "name is not ref"
and "name is not description" rules for name=* tags.
I don't find it common in 'my area' of mapping. One or two
examples would demonstrate the situation?
In any case:
The name tag is used on may things for example; buildings,
parks, schools, highways ...
The use of the name tag as 'name only' applies where ever the
name tag is used. This is similar for other tags such as
elevation, width, colour etc. No matter what feature they are
used on the tags carry the same characteristics and
restrictions. It is not necessary to repeat
these characteristics and restrictions for every main feature.
Routes have names, too! For example, here's the relation for OK
51, named for the name of the route.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/3108562
Meanwhile, I 40 in Arkansas has a good example of a name that is
actually a ref and a description, not a name.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/6843700
Finally, OK 19 is an example of a properly described no-name
route. https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/7479405
Ok. I still don't see a necessity of repeating the name tag
information inside the relation tag... Will you also repeat the
ref tag information, the description tag information? How about
the surface tag, maxspeed tag etc etc..
The name of the route has nothing to do with the name of the member ways.
Confusing is probably the issue here?
I am taking of 'the name tag' possibly I should have said the 'OSM key
name' .. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:name
Not taking of any individual feature with a 'name tag'.
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
