there are some notes in the Wiki about downgrading state highways
to tertiary if they don't connect up to other secondary roads at
reasonable intervals.
in the spirit of this, when i encountered a county route in Rensselaer
County that was a stub that only reached a couple of houses and
a
So it's clear from the responses thatthere are differing needs here:
Due to regional differences, displaying the two-letter USPS code in the shield is not necessarily desirable. For example, there are states where "SR" is more easily understood.
At the conceptual level, the same string should not
On Sat, Apr 9, 2011 at 7:41 AM, Craig Hinners cr...@hinnerspace.com wrote:
Of course, it would be desirable to have consensus on the syntax of the
conceptual-level tag, be it highway:network:us:fl=123, or
highway:network=us:fl:123, or highway=fl:123, but that's a
diversion from the crux of the
On Sat, Apr 9, 2011 at 10:21 AM, Toby Murray toby.mur...@gmail.com wrote:
route relations. The ref=* tag on ways right now is mostly tagging
for the renderer because current renderers don't use route relations.
Richard Weait has done some work on this:
http://weait.com/content/badges-badges
On 4/9/2011 8:41 AM, Richard Welty wrote:
there are some notes in the Wiki about downgrading state highways
to tertiary if they don't connect up to other secondary roads at
reasonable intervals.
in the spirit of this, when i encountered a county route in Rensselaer
County that was a stub that
On 4/9/2011 8:41 AM, Craig Hinners wrote:
* At the conceptual level, the same string should not be used to
represent the networks of multiple states, and some state-unique
ID, be it the USPS two-letter abbreviation or otherwise, is needed.
Why? We use the same prefixes for many
On 4/9/2011 10:21 AM, Toby Murray wrote:
This explicitly split out network information should be present in
route relations. The ref=* tag on ways right now is mostly tagging
for the renderer because current renderers don't use route relations.
And tagging for redundancy, since relations break
On 4/9/11 10:59 AM, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
On 4/9/2011 8:41 AM, Richard Welty wrote:
there are some notes in the Wiki about downgrading state highways
to tertiary if they don't connect up to other secondary roads at
reasonable intervals.
in the spirit of this, when i encountered a county
On 4/9/2011 11:18 AM, Richard Welty wrote:
i wouldn't, i think, upgrade everything that has full striping as that
would
mean that most all roads in, say, Saratoga County end up tertiary as the
towns there like to spend money on stripes. a standard based on striping
makes more sense in Rensselaer
On 04/08/2011 10:58 AM, Antony Pegg wrote:
Hello all,
MapQuest has pushed out three new developer tools for OSM. Hopefully
you will find them useful.
Full details are here on the developer blog:
http://devblog.mapquest.com/2011/04/07/xapi-npi-broken_polygons/
but to summarize:
On 04/08/2011 01:00 PM, James Mast wrote:
I just thought I would throw this out there so this can be settled once
and for all. Which ref tag setup do you think should be used for State
Highways on ways (not relations)? PA-44 or 44. The reason I'm
asking is because I've seen several people
On 04/08/2011 02:03 PM, Nathan Mills wrote:
I think ref=OK 20;AR 42 (or equally ref=AR 42;OK 20) is the appropriate
tag there.
Though a ref with two different states involved is fairly rare, about
the only spot I can think of where that would apply offhand would be
WA 500 if they ever start
On 04/08/2011 03:02 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
On 4/8/2011 3:58 PM, Richard Welty wrote:
i know NE2 likes to make the prefix go away for state ref tags
For Florida, yes, since that's the statewide standard. For other states,
I usually don't tag without a prefix. I certainly don't make it go
On 04/08/2011 02:11 PM, Kristian M Zoerhoff wrote:
On Fri, Apr 08, 2011 at 02:03:25PM -0500, Nathan Mills wrote:
On Fri, 08 Apr 2011 14:11:49 -0400, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
On 4/8/2011 2:00 PM, James Mast wrote:
I just thought I would throw this out there so this can be
settled once
and for
On 04/08/2011 07:16 PM, Toby Murray wrote:
Yeah... consensus would be great but seems to be rather elusive.
Here is a case in point. Another mapper has been tagging ways on
Kansas highways as K-xx which is how people usually pronounce it.
Street signs usually just have the number inside of
On 04/09/2011 07:41 AM, Craig Hinners wrote:
So it's clear from the responses that there are differing needs here:
* Due to regional differences, displaying the two-letter USPS code
in the shield is not necessarily desirable. For example, there are
states where SR is more
On Tue, 2011-04-05 at 02:23 -0700, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
Val Kartchner wrote:
I can confirm that this is still happening.
Fixed now. Thanks for the reports.
Richard
Richard,
It has been fixed. I'm back to using Potlatch 2 again. Thanks.
- Val -
At 2011-04-09 11:02, Paul Johnson wrote:
On 04/08/2011 11:47 AM, Alan Mintz wrote:
I would omit the hyphen as CA 247 for consistency sake.
I'm not sure which post this referred to. My understanding of the
discussion on this subject was that people agree that the hyphen is
necessary to join
18 matches
Mail list logo
