On 2018-11-28 06:49, Martijn van Exel wrote:
On Wed, 28 Nov 2018 02:07:45 -0800
Minh Nguyen <[email protected]> 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.
One page already documented an "NFH" prefix on ways and
network=US:NFSR:<forest> on relations. [1] I think I added that entry to
the table after seeing it on some forest routes in California. [2] But
I've changed it to an "FS" prefix since so many more ways are tagged
with that prefix. [3]
[1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_States_roads_tagging/Routes
[2] http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/E5V
[3] http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/E5W
--
[email protected]
_______________________________________________
Talk-us mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
