On Wed, 28 Nov 2018 02:07:45 -0800 Minh Nguyen <m...@nguyen.cincinnati.oh.us> wrote:
> On 2018-11-28 01:57, Minh Nguyen wrote: > > On 2018-11-20 08:57, Martijn van Exel wrote: > >> When I map these roads I include the FS number (just the number) > >> as a ref, since that is how they are signposted in the field. > > > > I think the ref tag on the ways should have a prefix and not just > > consist of a bare number. Otherwise, it's just as ambiguous for > > data consumers as the (123) refs all over New Jersey, since the > > U.S. doesn't have a highway tag that corresponds one-for-one with > > forest routes. > > (I hit send too soon.) Lots of shields show only the number and no > prefix, such as the U.S. Route shield, but we still use the "US" > prefix anyways. > > Data consumers really should be using route relations instead of ref > tags on ways whenever possible. Some ambiguity is unavoidable on way > refs, which IMO should reflect what's on plain-text signage or in > publications. If one thinks of the way refs as a compatibility shim, > then "FS" doesn't seem unreasonable as a prefix. I think you are right. It would be good if we can arrive at a common prefix and document it on the wiki. 'FS' makes sense. Perhaps even a new page dedicated to roads that are maintained directly by federal agencies (NPS, USDA, others?) would make sense. I'd be happy to help set it up. Martijn _______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
