On 20 June 2012 12:44, David Groom <revi...@pacific-rim.net> wrote: > I like the idea of prow:ref. I think footpath:ref a bit too specific, we'd > then need bridleway:ref, not to mention boat:ref (for byways open to all > traffic) which could be just TOO confusing! [snip] > In the UK at present there seem to be 7,004 ways tagged with designation =* > and ref = *, [snip] > It would be good to hear comments from user mikh43, and Robert Whittaker, as > the three of us account for 80% of the users who last edited those 7004 ways
If we decide that we need to have a key other than ref for PRoW numbers, then prow:ref seems to me be the best option from anything that's I've seen suggested here. And I can't think of anything better myself. Given that there is a potential clash with road reference numbers (which rightly should take priority) and there are definitely cases where this arises, then perhaps it would indeed be better to use a different key for the footpath etc numbers. If we do make a decision to go with prow:ref, then I think we should try to bulk change the existing uses of ref for PRoW numbers. It would probably be relatively easy to semi-manually review all 7,000 uses of a ref value on a way with a designation. For example, we should be safe with any values that contain only letters and numbers (so is unlikely to be a combination of two different refs separated by ";" or "/") and ends in "FP n", "BR n", "RB n" or "BY n" where n is any number (so looks like a PRoW number). This will probably cover any that I've added, and I'd be happy for them to be changed automatically. If there were any other common formats, we could probably match them too, and then only have to manually review the much smaller number that's left. Robert. -- Robert Whittaker _______________________________________________ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
