Abbreviations are predominant in US highway refs, so I think that it is fine to use one in USFS road refs.
At some point in time I had used ref=USFS xxx but changed stuff that I had edited to ref=FS xxx. The usage of FS in Michigan is largely a product of either my editing directly or my discussion with other mappers (and looking at Overpass Turbo and Taginfo, something like 45% of all refs with the string "FS" in them...). I don't remember really, but I think I started with USFS because it was nearly entirely unambiguous, and then I switched because the usage of FS was more common. ref:usfs=FS looks wrong to me, if usfs is in the key, then it doesn't belong repeated in the value (unless there's 2 reference systems in use, which there are, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forest_Highway is not the same thing as the Forest Service logging roads)). The use of ref:usfs also has the problem that it hides useful data on general purpose maps that don't specifically use it. If ref is to be used, I expect you won't arrive at any real consensus about what to use as a prefix, because it's easy to have an opinion about it (bikeshedding basically). I guess if enough people pick one we might get close. Max
_______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
