On Sun, 2009-04-12 at 20:26 -0400, Greg Troxel wrote: > Paul Johnson <[email protected]> writes: > > > Why make this more complicated than it has to be? Leave the names on > > the underlying way, not the relations; leave the refs on the relations, > > not the underlying ways. Then it's a matter of fixing mapnik and t...@h to > > do the right thing, since relations are set up better to handle things > > like route symbols. > > I don't follow why you think the name belongs on the way. I would think > that if there was a named road in a state that should be relation, and > that relation a member of the interstate relation for the state, and > that a member of the entire interstate relation. The key property to be > supported is arbitrarily nested relations.
I like names and refs where they make the most sense. If we get full (super-) relation support we have many options that work when they are right for the situation. > > I'm not logged in on the wiki right now to fix this on the relations > > list page, but we should probably recommend including a URL to a freely > > reproducible SVG of the route marker so someone has the motivation to > > fix rendering of numbered highways to use refs on relations in addition > > to (or better yet: instead of) underlying ways, they can render > > something other than the fugly ref symbols currently used, and instead > > use the same symbol used along the actual route. > > I don't see why symbol source is related to whether the ref is on a > relation or a way. But I agree that having symbols someplace where all > renderers can get at them would be nice. I made mine from wikimedia stock. I think they still need some fussing and attention to get them right. Perhaps a script will do better. _______________________________________________ Talk-ca mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
