On 8/18/19 10:05 PM, Kevin Kenny wrote: > route=road relations provide a way to group all the individual > segments of a numbered route into a coherent whole, and allow for > better handling of things like the choice of highway shield and the > handling of concurrencies (where two numbered routes run along the > same roadway).
Interesting, this answers something I've wondered about. Sometimes I see ways in data that you can tell the GPS signal dropped, those I just connect. I'm mapping locally, so have a sense of when that's appropriate, and can drive there to validate. When the metadata changes sometimes in the segments, those have to be separate to preserve that. For us that's often where you park the fire truck and get the UTV going... Anyway, as a long term solution, route=road seems the way to go after I get all the data cleaned up. > For your example, the 'ref' on the way would be 'CR2;FS 729.2B'. The > way would be a member of two route relations, one for the county road > and one for the Forest Service route. If I ever got around to adding all these relations, it might improve search. A big task unfortunately. There are other issues with how search works in OsmAnd, that's a different email list. :-) - rob - _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging