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.

    Meanwhile, I 40 in Arkansas has a good example of a name that is
    actually a ref and a description, not a name.

     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

Reply via email to