Re: [Talk-us] Use of ref-tag on state highways

2011-08-22 Thread Brad Neuhauser
I do my best to avoid anything to do with highway relations, but FWIW I recently did just this in Potlatch 2--split a way that's part of relations to add a bridge and totally ignored the relations--and it all worked out fine as far as I can tell: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/126659318

Re: [Talk-us] Use of ref-tag on state highways

2011-08-22 Thread Richard Welty
On 8/22/11 10:53 AM, Brad Neuhauser wrote: I do my best to avoid anything to do with highway relations, but FWIW I recently did just this in Potlatch 2--split a way that's part of relations to add a bridge and totally ignored the relations--and it all worked out fine as far as I can tell:

Re: [Talk-us] Use of ref-tag on state highways

2011-08-22 Thread Richard Fairhurst
Nathan Edgars II wrote: Exactly my point. Great Britain is fine with ref=M1 despite there being an M1 in many other countries - and even in Northern Ireland, part of the same country. There are some little-known fields in OSM data called latitude and longitude, which allow you to find out

Re: [Talk-us] Use of ref-tag on state highways

2011-08-22 Thread Richard Fairhurst
Mike N. wrote: Those with established and often-edited cycle routes are always complaining that they're broken. The most recent case is this week: http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=13524 Last editor was JOSM, and if his analysis was correct, the most recent edit broke the

Re: [Talk-us] Use of ref-tag on state highways

2011-08-22 Thread Nathan Edgars II
On 8/22/2011 12:05 PM, Richard Fairhurst wrote: Nathan Edgars II wrote: Exactly my point. Great Britain is fine with ref=M1 despite there being an M1 in many other countries - and even in Northern Ireland, part of the same country. There are some little-known fields in OSM data called

Re: [Talk-us] Use of ref-tag on state highways

2011-08-22 Thread Nathan Mills
On Mon, 22 Aug 2011 13:31:51 -0400, Nathan Edgars II wrote: And what state, despite the implications of some here. Other than the cases where a state maintains a road as part of their route network which is not actually in that state. Or the more common case where a state highway is

Re: [Talk-us] Use of ref-tag on state highways

2011-08-22 Thread Nathan Edgars II
On 8/21/2011 4:34 PM, Ian Dees wrote: I really don't understand this logic. I have never run into a case where JOSM has broken a relation in a way that wasn't obvious to me. Obviously I don't get around as much as you, Nathan, but can you remind me of a specific case where a relation breaks over

Re: [Talk-us] Use of ref-tag on state highways

2011-08-22 Thread Nathan Mills
On Mon, 22 Aug 2011 15:08:22 -0400, Nathan Edgars II wrote: In both those (literally) edge cases, the relation will tell all. So are you volunteering to make relations for every route that has this complication? ___ Talk-us mailing list

Re: [Talk-us] Use of ref-tag on state highways

2011-08-22 Thread Richard Weait
On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 4:52 PM, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com wrote: On 8/22/2011 4:46 PM, Nathan Mills wrote: On Mon, 22 Aug 2011 15:08:22 -0400, Nathan Edgars II wrote: In both those (literally) edge cases, the relation will tell all. So are you volunteering to make relations for

Re: [Talk-us] Use of ref-tag on state highways

2011-08-22 Thread Nathan Edgars II
On 8/22/2011 5:47 PM, Richard Weait wrote: If there is no overlap, a single network / ref pair will work just fine. Why wouldn't it? What breaks is multi-values in network / ref tags. Don't do that. We have better ways to do this; relations. Relations break. Hence ref tags are there as a

Re: [Talk-us] Use of ref-tag on state highways

2011-08-22 Thread Nathan Mills
On Mon, 22 Aug 2011 16:52:48 -0400, Nathan Edgars II wrote: But the same problem exists with county routes along county lines. Do you think the ref tag for a county route should contain a county abbreviation? FIPS codes would be better, as they are a completely unique identifier for US

Re: [Talk-us] Use of ref-tag on state highways

2011-08-22 Thread Ian Dees
On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 4:49 PM, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.comwrote: On 8/22/2011 5:47 PM, Richard Weait wrote: If there is no overlap, a single network / ref pair will work just fine. Why wouldn't it? What breaks is multi-values in network / ref tags. Don't do that. We have better

Re: [Talk-us] Use of ref-tag on state highways

2011-08-22 Thread Nathan Edgars II
On 8/22/2011 5:53 PM, Ian Dees wrote: Ways break too, it's just that editors sometimes remember to fix them during their edit session (e.g. by copying the tags when they dual-carriage a way). If we get people to fix the relations too, then they won't break. So how will we do this? I've

[Talk-us] A proposal to improve relation handling

2011-08-22 Thread Nathan Edgars II
I and some other mappers have noticed that relations are more prone to breaking than equivalent tags on ways. (For a simple example, imagine two people simultaneously editing different parts of a route and each splitting a way, e.g. to add a maxspeed to a portion. If the route is stored as a

[Talk-us] Planet extract for the US

2011-08-22 Thread Martijn van Exel
Hi all, Is there a ready-made, reasonably frequently updated planet extract for the contiguous US available somewhere? Right now I am merging the partial US extracts made available by Geofabrik, but I'd love to be able to get it directly. Martijn -- martijn van exel schaaltreinen.nl

Re: [Talk-us] Planet extract for the US

2011-08-22 Thread Martijn van Exel
Oh BTW, I mean PBF - I know that Cloudmade has xml extracts for the US. Probably still easier to download that and convert to PBF than what I'm doing now. Martijn On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 11:53 PM, Martijn van Exel m...@rtijn.org wrote: Hi all, Is there a ready-made, reasonably frequently