On Sat, May 12, 2012 at 6:01 PM, Mike N <nice...@att.net> wrote: > On 5/12/2012 5:54 PM, Anthony wrote: >> >> If so, this is good, but it does mean that road names are going to get >> out of sync, if, for instance, tiger:name_base was removed from some >> of the ways and not removed from others. This will complicate later >> fixes/enhancements. > > > This also happens long term as people create roads from scratch and don't > know about the abbreviation rule when starting.
Yeah, it does, but we're not discussing that right now. If we can avoid adding tens of thousands of more of these cases, we should. And it seems we can. Even a simple rule like assuming that two connected ways with the same name are the road would be a useful addition. Something more complicated, especially something that looks at the history, would be even better. _______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
