Re: [Talk-us] Minimum standards for motorways?

On 01/03/2011 08:33 AM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > On Mon, Jan 3, 2011 at 9:06 AM, Paul Johnson > wrote: >> On 01/03/2011 05:14 AM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: >>> On Sun, Jan 2, 2011 at 10:43 PM, Paul Johnson >>> wrote: On 01/01/2011 09:45 AM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > Yes - Seattle's Alas

Re: [Talk-us] US highway tagging (was Re: highway shields: "get your kicks, where?")

On 01/03/2011 10:08 AM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: >> Also, is it now "correct" to not tag (network, ref) the individual ways that >> are part of a route relation? What about name? Is it "correct" to remove >> those existing tags from the ways (and ensure they are on the relation)? I'm >> not talking

Re: [Talk-us] US highway tagging (was Re: highway shields: "get your kicks, where?")

On 01/03/2011 09:52 AM, Alan Mintz wrote: > At 2011-01-02 19:46, Paul Johnson wrote: >> On 01/01/2011 11:55 AM, Richard Weait wrote: >> > I've been adding more highway shields to the shield renderer. Most >> > recently I've added a shield for Historic Route 66. >> > >> > >> http://weait.com:8080/m

Re: [Talk-us] Minimum standards for motorways?

On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 3:12 AM, Paul Johnson wrote: > On 01/03/2011 08:33 AM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: >> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZeGUSMssl7k&t=0m15s >> There's not much merging room (no worse than on many Interstates), but >> it's nowhere near a right angle. > > I'm familiar with the ramp,

Re: [Talk-us] US highway tagging (was Re: highway shields: "get your kicks, where?")

No, it's not correct to remove refs from ways. I really would like to hear wider input on this, still, as it really doesn't make sense to waste the way's ref tag for refs that don't belong to the way, but the route that uses the way... I agree - it's premature to redefine the usage of ref unt

Re: [Talk-us] US highway tagging (was Re: highway shields: "get your kicks, where?")

On 1/4/11 3:18 AM, Paul Johnson wrote: On 01/03/2011 10:08 AM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: Also, is it now "correct" to not tag (network, ref) the individual ways that are part of a route relation? What about name? Is it "correct" to remove those existing tags from the ways (and ensure they are on

Re: [Talk-us] US highway tagging (was Re: highway shields: "get your kicks, where?")

At 2011-01-04 00:16, Paul Johnson wrote: On 01/03/2011 09:52 AM, Alan Mintz wrote: > network=US:US > ref=66 > modifier=HISTORIC Technically, probably shouldn't exist, since US-66 hasn't existed since sometime in the late 1980s and it's using the recreational brown signs today. Given the number

Re: [Talk-us] US highway tagging (was Re: highway shields: "get your kicks, where?")

* Mike N. [2011-01-04 06:58 -0500]: > >>No, it's not correct to remove refs from ways. > > > >I really would like to hear wider input on this > > I agree - it's premature to redefine the usage of ref until a > number of renderers are getting route information from other sources > such as the rel

Re: [Talk-us] US highway tagging (was Re: highway shields: "get your kicks, where?")

On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 9:29 AM, Phil! Gold wrote: > There was rough consensus that the current approach is more or less right, > but disagreement on several specifics. Richard Weait suggested that > further discussion probably wouldn't accomplish much without a sample > implementation, so I've (

Re: [Talk-us] US highway tagging (was Re: highway shields: "get your kicks, where?")

* Ian Dees [2011-01-04 09:36 -0600]: > What changes to osm2pgsql are you making? In my opinion, any approach has to be backwards compatible with having ref tags on ways, if only because it's worked so well in Europe. Thus, I want to be able to tell whether a given way is a member of a route rela

Re: [Talk-us] US highway tagging (was Re: highway shields: "get your kicks, where?")

On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 11:04 AM, Phil! Gold wrote: > If I recall correctly, Richard's rendering completely abandons the old > rendering style, which I don't want to do. Then let me make this point absolutely clear. Don't look at the background layer. It doesn't matter at all. Look at the shie

Re: [Talk-us] NY: replacing county borders

Here's the release schedule for 2010 TIGER shapefiles: http://www.census.gov/geo/www/tiger/tgrshp2010/release_schedule.html Looks like New York is only available right now via FTP (there's a link at the above address). An FYI r

Re: [Talk-us] NY: replacing county borders

On 1/3/11 8:42 PM, Richard Welty wrote: On 1/3/11 8:11 PM, Michal Migurski wrote: Sounds like a sane way forward to me. Are you using the new 2010 files that they're slowly releasing? Do you plan to keep all the FIPS info as you go? i haven't yet seen 2010 boundary files of any sort yet. i

Re: [Talk-us] NY: replacing county borders

For anyone's interest, I've been grabbing the TIGER 2010 shapefiles as they show up and mirroring them here: http://cube.telascience.org/osm/tiger2010/ Their FTP site seems to get very busy at times (<10KBps) so feel free to grab from there. I've also

Re: [Talk-us] NY: replacing county borders

On 1/4/11 11:53 AM, Brad Neuhauser wrote: Here's the release schedule for 2010 TIGER shapefiles: http://www.census.gov/geo/www/tiger/tgrshp2010/release_schedule.html Looks like New York is only available right now via FTP (there's a link at the above address). yes, i found them, trying to s

Re: [Talk-us] NY: replacing county borders

On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 11:24 AM, Richard Welty wrote: > On 1/4/11 11:53 AM, Brad Neuhauser wrote: > >> Here's the release schedule for 2010 TIGER shapefiles: >> http://www.census.gov/geo/www/tiger/tgrshp2010/release_schedule.html >> >> Looks like New York is only available right now via FTP (there

Re: [Talk-us] US highway tagging (was Re: highway shields: "get your kicks, where?")

* Richard Weait [2011-01-04 11:49 -0500]: > On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 11:04 AM, Phil! Gold wrote: > > If I recall correctly, Richard's rendering completely abandons the old > > rendering style, which I don't want to do. > > Then let me make this point absolutely clear. Don't look at the > backgrou

Re: [Talk-us] US highway tagging (was Re: highway shields: "get your kicks, where?")

On 01/04/2011 10:49 AM, Richard Weait wrote: Then let me make this point absolutely clear. Don't look at the background layer. It doesn't matter at all. Look at the shield overlay. The shield overlay could be added to any rendering layer. Not sure if you’re looking for commentary on the shi