For starters, this is a more constructive response than the "go away". Thanks.
There is a ref-tag on a way and a ref-tag in the relation. Although they are both called "ref", that does not directly mean they're the same. My suggestion: use the way-ref for the most important one. If you want to know to which other routes the way is also part of: look at the relations the way is part of. Op 21 aug. 2011, om 20:22 heeft Alan Mintz het volgende geschreven: > At 2011-08-21 10:57, Henk Hoff wrote: >> For every rule we can find exceptions. > > In this case, I will guess the exceptions (shared routes) are less than 5% of > the ways. > > >> The basic idea behind the decision-tree was: use the most important / most >> logical route for the way-ref tag. > > If you know the "important one", make it the first value in the series. > > >> Putting every single route-label in the ref-tag is not a good idea. > > Why? I guess that 95% have only one, 4% have two, and the remaining 1% might > have more (I seem to remember seeing 4 in the midwest somewhere). Remember > we're only talking about the road routes themselves. Bike routes, etc. go in > their own tags. > > >> If you want to identify a whole route, use a relation. Based on the >> relations (a way is part of) a routing engine could then identify under >> which other route numbers this road is also known by. > > As someone pointed out, once you put them in a relation, the tags on the ways > become duplicative. While this is generally bad database design, it's also > true that many consumers don't deal with relations, and so we need the > duplication and the problems that go with it. > > -- > Alan Mintz <[email protected]> > > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-us mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us _______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
