On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 2:26 PM, Andy Allan <gravityst...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 1:24 PM, Richard Mann > <richard.mann.westoxf...@googlemail.com> wrote: >> What purpose do the _link tags serve other than rendering? > > They can be used by routers to give more accurate descriptions... That's a reason for calling them links, not a reason for tag-to-higher
> http://osm.org/go/0...@c9as- Could equally well be tertiary_link. OS would have them as tertiary_link (my Landranger still has it as a flat junction!) > As I say though, it's a well used and well established scheme, and we > should be very wary of changing it just because of some edge cases > where the rendering doesn't work correctly or where a particular > junction seems bizarrely tagged. I don't think this is robust to non-geek rendering (which I think is going to kick off fairly soon). People are going to start rendering their towns, and tag-for-higher (and the normal renderer's response of putting links under everything) just produces too much of a mess, too often. People will find ways round it (like ignoring the wiki), but it's better to solve the issue, and issue rendering advice that'll actually work most of the time. I'm more than happy for the wiki to say that tag-for-higher was the norm for a long time and you need to be aware that it will remain in the data for a long time. But tag-for-lower is better. Richard _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
