On Oct 23, 2012, at 1:54 PM, Michal Migurski wrote:
> On Oct 21, 2012, at 8:54 PM, Michal Migurski wrote:
>
>> I feel like this scrubbing process has revealed so much about the
>> intricacies of different road networks that I'm going to take a slightly
>> different approach, and focus my work on just the ref and modifier tags. I
>> can standardize the US:US and US:I networks along with US:CA where I live,
>> but I should hold off on attempting to overfit other states' network tags.
>
>
> Here's the newest:
> http://mike.teczno.com/img/OSM-Extracted-Routes-changes-2.csv.zip
>
> There are 5,828 changes now. I have left the network tags alone, generally.
> Most changes are focused on the ref and modifier tags.
I'm looking for advice & feedback.
I applied these changes to OSM last night, in a series of five changesets:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/13611326
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/13612265
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/13612825
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/13612736
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/13613023
Offlist, I've been talking to NE2 about the edits, and he pointed out this
morning that they negatively affect shield rendering on Aperiodic:
http://elrond.aperiodic.net/shields/?zoom=15&lat=38.7166&lon=-77.79472&layers=B
"Whereas formerly relations with network=US:US and the modifier in the ref
failed somewhat gracefully if a bit pigheadedly (by not displaying shields at
all), they now show up incorrectly as mainline routes." - NE2
NE2 asked me to revert the changes, because he's unhappy with me moving the
route variant information from the ref tags to the modifier tags, e.g. turning
"ref=80 Business" into "ref=80 modifier=Business". According to the supported
tagging guidelines on Aperiodic, my interpretation should be correct: "The
value of the ref tag on the relation must contain just the route number,
without any network information."
http://elrond.aperiodic.net/shields/supported.html
I'm looking for guidance on this changeset, with the intent of making route
relation information in the US internally consistent. I can simply revert it,
but I wasn't happy with the state of relation tags before and I'll continue to
look for ways to make them consistent nationally. I can apply a new changeset
that moves or duplicates the variant information in the modifier tags to the
ref tags, but this feels incorrect. I can apply an alternative changeset that
moves or duplicates the variant information to the *network* tags (another
recommendation from the Aperiodic tagging guideline), but previous
conversations about this change led me to believe that messing with the network
tags too much would be a Bad Idea.
For those of you with an interest in the route relations, what do you think is
the correct next move here?
NE2, I've been talking to you offlist but I hope you jump in here.
-mike.
----------------------------------------------------------------
michal migurski- [email protected]
415.558.1610
_______________________________________________
Talk-us mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
