I'd be inclined to include "Road" on that. On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 5:06 PM <[email protected]> wrote:
> > County Road 14, Boundary County ID. TIGER name is "Camp Nine Road", > joins with a forest road labelled in the US Forest Roads Overlay as just > "Camp Nine". > > Around 48.7993305N 116.2837172W > > Mark. > > On 2020/07/30 8:12, Paul Johnson wrote: > > Could we get some examples of what you mean? > > > > On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 5:26 PM <[email protected] > > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > > > That seems sensible. What about the general case (i.e. no continuity > > with a county road?) - to add "road" or not? > > > > On 2020/07/30 7:09, Paul Johnson wrote: > > > I'd generally include the whole name including "Road" in that case. > > > > > > On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 5:03 PM <[email protected] > > <mailto:[email protected]> > > > <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>> > wrote: > > > > > > Quick question for clarification. > > > > > > The US Forest Roads overlay in JOSM shows the name of forest > roads > > > without "Road"; e.g. "Burton Creek B". Should the suffix > > "road" be added > > > or is it redundant and a waste of bytes? (Sometimes there may > be > > > continuity from, say, a County Road with e.g. "Burton Creek > Road", > > > though.) > > > > > > Mark. > > > > > > On 2020/07/30 2:55, Paul Johnson wrote: > > > > Alright, I think we have a consensus forming. Someone want > > to update > > > > the wiki? > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 12:30 PM Evin Fairchild > > > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > > <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> > > > > <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > > <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>>> wrote: > > > > > > > > I'm also in favor of this change. It's a route number, > > so it only > > > > should be in the ref tag. This will make Forest service > > roads more > > > > consistent with other numbered routes. Even though most, > if > > > not all, > > > > Forest service roads don't have a name but just a > number, I > > > still am > > > > in favor of this. I was a bit surprised that the wiki was > > > saying to > > > > keep the road number in the name. > > > > > > > > In fact, the names that most of these forest service > > roads have > > > > don't even match common parlance. Most people refer to > > them as > > > > "Forest Service Road XX" whereas the TIGER import called > > them > > > > "National Forest Development Road XX," which might be > > the official > > > > name, but not the most common name. > > > > > > > > -Evin > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jul 29, 2020, 6:47 AM Mike Thompson > > > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > > <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> > > > > <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > > <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>>> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jul 28, 2020 at 1:33 PM Paul Johnson > > > > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > > <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> > > > <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > > <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>>> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Could we get the US Road Tagging page updated to > > reflect > > > > common name practice instead of encouraging the > > > duplication > > > > of the ref in the name? Or is that going to > > spark drama? > > > > > > > > I am in favor of the change. The name tag should be > > for the > > > > name only. > > > > > > > > Mike > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > Talk-us mailing list > > > > [email protected] > > <mailto:[email protected]> > > > <mailto:[email protected] > > <mailto:[email protected]>> > > <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > > > <mailto:[email protected] > > <mailto:[email protected]>>> > > > > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > Talk-us mailing list > > > > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > > <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected] > >> > > > > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Talk-us mailing list > > > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > > <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected] > >> > > > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Talk-us mailing list > > > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > > > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Talk-us mailing list > > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Talk-us mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us > > > > -- > Mark Brown > 8-3-17-803 Shimorenjaku, Mitaka, Tokyo 181-0013 > Tel/fax: 0422 42 3151 > Mobile: 090 8774 7483 (Japan) > +44 843 849 0359 (UK, VoIP) > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-us mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us >
_______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
