Yes! I agree 100%. Zeke
On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 5:36 AM, Paul Johnson <[email protected]> wrote: > It's time to retire ref=* on highway=* ways to describe attributes > of the overlying route instead of the physical attributes of the way > itself. Using the ref= tag on ways to describe routes simply > creates more problems than it solves for many reasons. > > * The ref=* tag on a way is describing properties of a route that > is using the way, not a property of the way itself. > > * Many bridges and tunnels have signed references that would > actually be physical attributes of a way, but with the ref= tag on > ways describing the overlying route instead of the way itself, > makes it impossible to properly describe these attributes if ref= on > a way is describing the route above the way, not the way itself. > > * The ref= tag as defined for ways now includes more than the ref, > but also the network. ncn_ref, int_ref, etc were created as an > attempt to describe network references uniquely, but there aren't > *_ref keys for every possible network already in play. > > * The US has two federal highway networks, each state has it's own > highway network, and counties and cities have the option for their > own local networks. That's at minimum 52+ *_ref keys that would be > needed to describe each network uniquely...for the US alone! And > we're not even into transit or other routes that might use the way! > > * Munging the modifier=, network= and ref= tags provided by > relations into a single do-all ref= tag creates more problems than > it solves, particularly for formatting. It also creates > hard-to-answer questions for renderers and parsers. > > * Multiple routes, particularly when they are involved in multiple > networks, creates unmanageable way ref= tags. It also makes it > more difficult to describe attributes that belong to the route, > not the way itself (such as which direction it's going, whether it's > a bypass, business, toll or other sort of route, etc). > > Given that we have route relations, and have had them for some time > now, perhaps now is the time to: > > * put ref= information pertaining to the route that travels on the > way to a relation for that route. Provide facilities to search by > network and ref on relations. > > * Actively remove ref= tags describing routes from ways that have > route relations already: Let's kill this dinosaur. > > Thoughts? > > > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-us mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us >
_______________________________________________ newbies mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/newbies
