Re: [Talk-GB] Tagging U road numbers [was: Search but cannot find]
On 19 March 2015 at 01:39, Pmailkeey . pmailk...@googlemail.com wrote: So all ABCU road numbers need to be consistently placed No they don't. We've had the discussion many times before, and in the UK we don't put C or U refs into the ref tag. This is for good reasons, as other people have explained. It seems OSM needs people who know something about databases and usefulness of data. Now you are just being very, very rude. Thanks, Andy ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Tagging U road numbers [was: Search but cannot find]
On 19 March 2015 at 09:39, Andy Allan gravityst...@gmail.com wrote: On 19 March 2015 at 01:39, Pmailkeey . pmailk...@googlemail.com wrote: So all ABCU road numbers need to be consistently placed No they don't. We've had the discussion many times before, and in the UK we don't put C or U refs into the ref tag. This is for good reasons, as other people have explained. It seems OSM needs people who know something about databases and usefulness of data. Now you are just being very, very rude. Thanks, Andy Lacking the intelligence to recognise the errors is another issue. The first step to a cure is to admit there's a problem in the first place. -- Mike. @millomweb https://sites.google.com/site/millomweb/index/introduction - For all your info on Millom and South Copeland via *the area's premier website - * *currently unavailable due to ongoing harassment of me, my family, property pets* TCs https://sites.google.com/site/pmailkeey/e-mail ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Tagging U road numbers [was: Search but cannot find]
UGH ! :(( Noble - in my case Karen. Died April, last year (or was it the year before) - cancer. I've just been OSMing in her area - she was an infamous author - amongst her 'titles' is The Highway Code - the official book blah blah - the official title of the book. What HMSO turn out now: The Official Highway Code is not the official title of the official book. She was a good source of roads technicalities. On 18 March 2015 at 21:13, Donald Noble drno...@gmail.com wrote: This came up in discussions at the Edinburgh pub Meetup last night, and those there (quite a few of the prominent mappers in Scotland) agreed that eg U1234 should be on either admin_ref or official_ref (whichever was most popular) And not on the main ref tag. Also perhaps a case for not rendering references on residential roads? But the issue with routing engines directing onto unsigned road references meant we felt it was more than just a rendering issue. Donald I'm sure it'd be wrong to put one set of data across more than one field. So all ABCU road numbers need to be consistently placed irrespective of whether the data appears on signage. In towns, streetnames should 'come first' out of directions systems. The earlier comment of take the U1234 being meaningless without signage is just as useless as Take Tippins Lane when Tippins Lane isn't signed either yet the name appears on the maps. What's in the database isn't relevant to 'directions'. Directions software should be able to distinguish between the value of Follow A47 and Follow U1234 and Follow Tippin's Lane. It should also accommodate Turn left at The Church (I'll leave it up to you to decide what liquid gets worshipped at The Church) as many people seem to like to navigate by buildings. At the fork in the road, you have reached MacDonalds. It seems OSM needs people who know something about databases and usefulness of data. Whether A, B, C or U, primary/trunk/secondary/tertiary is fairly irrelevant to the road user. Speed of travel, directness of route and suitability of route are the most useful bits of data the road user has to interpret out of all the fluff. -- Mike. @millomweb https://sites.google.com/site/millomweb/index/introduction - For all your info on Millom and South Copeland via *the area's premier website - * *currently unavailable due to ongoing harassment of me, my family, property pets* TCs https://sites.google.com/site/pmailkeey/e-mail ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Tagging U road numbers [was: Search but cannot find]
This came up in discussions at the Edinburgh pub Meetup last night, and those there (quite a few of the prominent mappers in Scotland) agreed that eg U1234 should be on either admin_ref or official_ref (whichever was most popular) And not on the main ref tag. Also perhaps a case for not rendering references on residential roads? But the issue with routing engines directing onto unsigned road references meant we felt it was more than just a rendering issue. Donald On Wednesday, March 18, 2015, Dan S danstowell+...@gmail.com wrote: 2015-03-18 15:54 GMT+00:00 p...@trigpoint.me.uk javascript:;: On Wed Mar 18 15:38:13 2015 GMT, Pmailkeey . wrote: U-numbers are used publicly - most often on temporary planning development notices attached to street lights etc. If they are not signed, then they do not belong in the ref tag. The consensus is that such information belongs in an admin_ref tag, a sat nav instruction to 'turn left into the U666' is very unhelpful. Can you point us to some further reading about this admin_ref tag? The wiki isn't telling me about it. If there is indeed a consensus then it'd be nice for it to be documented! Dan ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org javascript:; https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb -- Donald Noble http://drnoble.co.uk - http://flickr.com/photos/drnoble ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
