On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 6:20 AM, Liz ed...@billiau.net wrote:
Those sort of 'internal reference numbers' are used heavily in New South
Wales. They aren't easy to work out and don't help with navigation. They would
need a non-rendering tag - no use a router trying to send me down 'MR380'
That's
2010/2/3 Richard Welty rwe...@averillpark.net:
by way of context, New York State and some NY counties have cases where
there are roads maintained
by the state or county that do not have numberedsigned route
designations. these roads have numbers
assigned administratively (reference routes)
so should a reference route designation that isn't on a sign go in a ref
tag or not? the wiki doesn't
discuss this. if ref shouldn't have this, perhaps a variant on ref is
needed?
I would say no - because the ref tag can generate route shields. I would
be very confused if the county road
On 2/3/10 9:26 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
IMHO the ref-tag describes the reference, not a sign, therefore to tag
them it doesn't matter if the reference numbers are displayed
laterally on signs or there is another source of getting them. Still
if you say that those numbers (reference
On 2/3/10 9:31 AM, Mike N. wrote:
so should a reference route designation that isn't on a sign go in a ref
tag or not? the wiki doesn't
discuss this. if ref shouldn't have this, perhaps a variant on ref is
needed?
I would say no - because the ref tag can generate route shields. I
Richard Welty wrote:
administratively, a reference route is no different from a
conventional signed route number. from a practical point of view, you
almost never see a reference route on a sign. what we come back to is
tagging for the renderer, if we put the reference route designations
On 2/3/10 10:29 AM, Chris Hill wrote:
Richard Welty wrote:
administratively, a reference route is no different from a
conventional signed route number. from a practical point of view, you
almost never see a reference route on a sign. what we come back to is
tagging for the renderer, if we put
You say numbers assigned administratively (reference routes) that do not
appear on signs. which sounds like internal numbers which are never used by
the public in any form. So nobody will say turn left and take the C29 for 2
kms...
If this is the case, I would ask first if OSM is the right place
On Thu, 4 Feb 2010, Richard Welty wrote:
so should a reference route designation that isn't on a sign go in a ref
tag or not? the wiki doesn't
discuss this. if ref shouldn't have this, perhaps a variant on ref is
needed?
Those sort of 'internal reference numbers' are used heavily in New
At 2010-02-03 06:19, Richard Welty wrote:
...
so should a reference route designation that isn't on a sign go in a ref
tag or not? the wiki doesn't
discuss this. if ref shouldn't have this, perhaps a variant on ref is
needed?
I would say the question is what happens when one of these routes is
On 2/3/10 4:33 PM, Alan Mintz wrote:
At 2010-02-03 06:19, Richard Welty wrote:
...
so should a reference route designation that isn't on a sign go in a ref
tag or not? the wiki doesn't
discuss this. if ref shouldn't have this, perhaps a variant on ref is
needed?
I would say the
11 matches
Mail list logo
