-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Richard Fairhurst wrote: | Robert (Jamie) Munro wrote: | |> If that is the case, then the relationship is essential to convey the |> route of the A11 information. If the road just has 2 numbers, then it |> isn't - just a semi-colon in the ref would do. | | But bearing in mind that this section _isn't_ the A11 and to tag it | as such is therefore wrong, then we map the facts on the ground - and | that's "signage=A14 (A11)". Of course, if you want to go round | tagging every single sign then good luck to you, but...
It might not be the A11 from the point of view of who is in charge of maintaining it, but it is the A11 from the point of view of someone following the route of the A11 to get somewhere. Therefore it should be in a relationship as part of the A11, but should not be tagged "ref=A11". If you tag it ref=A14 (A11), which may not be wrong, then when you ask OSMXAPI for ref=A14 or ref=A11, neither route will be complete. It just has to be a relationship. You can even tag the shared section's membership of the relationship as "shared" or something. Robert (Jamie) Munro -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFH+gd0z+aYVHdncI0RAnUfAJ0Q7BbXpNUJ6bsadnYsWQXx0fW4IgCffbDU OEThxkdqgxx/hrnjqEtCwds= =q0te -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
