On Sat, Oct 28, 2017 at 9:02 AM, Éric Gillet <gill3t.3ric+...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2017-10-28 14:29 GMT+02:00 Ilya Zverev <i...@zverev.info>: > >> [Philippe Verdy's] number of edits makes his work virtually unverifyable >> and unrevertable. >> > > OSM is a do-o-cracy; blaming people (especially people investing a lot of > time) for their implication is not the way to go. > Meritocracy. And I've personally struggled with this, especially with what is more or less the smear of trunks in North America, and my well publicised opinion of what should qualify for trunk on my continent. Lesser so on the slow simmering edit battle for the name=* tag. Kinda feel like things like name=British Columbia Highway 99 shouldn't have a name=* value at all, in favor of ref=BC 99 (currently mapped as the name tag above and ref=99 as of last check). This is even internally confusing as the Transcanada Highway values for 1 and 16 are not identified as BC highways, but as TCH highways. So I'd be inclined as mapping the former as ref=BC 99 without a name, and 1 and 16 as ref=CA 1 and ref=CA 16 with name=* values reflecting their proper names, not their highway numbers. Sask suffers similar issues, what with the Sask Trunk and Sask Provincial highways (75 automatically comes to mind thanks to Emerson; but maybe they have a Texas thing going on with a multitude of state highway systems of differing priority). I get that the (relatively informal) Transcanada Highway system is closest to the US Highway System and what provincial highways are and that there's literally no Interstate equivalent in Canada or Mexico. But having the entire continent on a coherent understanding would be appreciated.
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
