FWIW, I agree with all of Jason's suggestions, below, for the relation-level "network" tag values. It mirrors my thinking on the matter exactly.
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Use of ref-tag on state highways
From: Jason Straub <[email protected]>
Date: Wed, August 24, 2011 3:37 pm
To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
As the person that just got done labelling each TX state highway, I'll chime in here with some comments.
For the network tag, I think that the labelling should be (country : state network : network within the state : subnetwork in state), while the ref is JUST the number for that highway. So:
US:I -> Interstate
US:I:BUS -> Business Interstate
US:US -> US Route
US:US:BUS -> Business US Route
US:US:ALT:BUS -> Business Alt US Route
US:TX -> Texas State Highway
US:TX:FM -> Farm to Market
US:TX:RM -> Ranch To Market
US:TX:FM:Bus -> Business Farm to Market
Having been through most of the highways in TX at least, this works for all that i've labelled, whether it's still that way or not. I prefer to have the final labels show the state abbreviation and number (TX 10) instead of generic state labeling (SH 10) (TX has state highways, not state routes), but am willing to work with either. Once a useful mapping tiling appears that uses state shields, this wont matter nearly as much.
Jason
25or6to4
>network=US:TX:SR
>ref=10
>= Texas State road 10
>network=US:FL:Orange:CR
>ref=10
>= Florida Orange county road 10
>network=US:TX:FARM
>ref=10
>= Texas State Farm road 10
>Wouldn't this just use one US in network?
>network=US:BUSINESS
>ref=50
>= US Business 50
_______________________________________________
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
