On Tue, Jan 7, 2020 at 3:15 PM Tod Fitch <[email protected]> wrote:
> In my area there seems to be a mix of how the US Forest Service route > numbers are tagged on roads and trails. The main variations seem to be: > > name=“Forest Route 9N24” > name=“FR 9N24” > alt_name=“Forest Route 9N24” > alt_name=“FR 9N24” > ref=“FR 9N24” > ref=“9N24” > Well, name should only be the name. So the first four are wrong, refs are not names. > Things I’ve seen in the wiki that might pertain cover “National Forest > Trails” [1] which seems to want a tag of “route_no” or “trail_no”. That > just seems wrong. > > And in the United States roads tagging [2] which seems to prefer tagging > like: > > ref=“NFR 9N24” > > Which I don’t recall seeing in my area. > > What should the preferred tagging be? My inclination would be to migrate > the tagging in my area toward that listed on the US road tagging page (e.g. > ref=“NFR 9N24”) even though my preference (for printed map display > purposes) would be to simply use ref=“9N24”. > I'd go with ref=NF 9N24 and strongly consider making a route relation for it. Ideally, this would all be moot and it'd just be a refless, nameless way with the route being on the relation alone (same could be said of roads) but for some reason people don't want to kill the dinosaur on that still.
_______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
