I like the fact that they took some artistic license and used "stylized", or "iconified" shields, rather than trying to do a perfect pixel-per-pixel resize of the prototype shields. The latter method does not necessarily produce good on-screen results.(Which is to be expected, given that the
Phil! Gold phi...@pobox.com:
It seems to me that network=US:US:Business:MD is the logical extension of
a scheme that has US:US and US:US:Business.
My initial reaction is that this goes too far in mixing geographic,
classification, and rendering concepts, which has a bad smell:
* It forces one
Chris Lawrence lordsu...@gmail.com:
modifier=* would represent MUTCD-type banners attached to the shield
This is the first I've heard of this tag. I don't recall it being
discussed when we were hashing ideas around on this last summer. (Not
that that is reason to discount it.)
But what came out
Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com:
It seems that many people see the network tag as not representing a
network but a shield design. Does this sound accurate?
No, because, where shield designs differ by agency for the same logical
network classification, the network tag does not change,
This was discussed in the August 2011 thread, Use of ref-tag on state
highways.
At the time, a number of people seemed to be on board with the
network-classification-per-banner scheme, as in:
network=US:US:Alternate
ref=1
Or, something similar at the state level:
network=US:VA:Secondary
[Richard] Clearly these evil paint-separated commuter lanes are a gateway
way to one-area-per-lane micro-mapping. [...]
[Paul] I'm not seeing how the slippery slope argument applies [...]
Nor am I.
Choosing to model distinct, disparate, and incompatible traffic flows as
a single flow when
What to model as discrete ways has always struck me as a gray area in the OSM model.
I'm of the opinion that,at locations where traffic maynot or cannottransfer from one linear flow to another, the flows should be modelled as discrete ways.
Thereason for the inability to transfer between flows
Paul Norman penor...@mac.com
I would not separate a road with a double-yellow in the middle into two
separate ways
And millions of miles of two-lane roads with opposing flows have been
modeled in OSM as single ways. But why?
I'd submit that it's because the current de facto usage of ways is
FWIW, I agree with allof Jason's suggestions, below,for the relation-level "network" tag values. It mirrors my thinking on the matter exactly.
Original Message Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Use of ref-tag on state highwaysFrom: Jason Straub strau...@yahoo.comDate: Wed, August 24, 2011
Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Use of ref-tag on state highways
From: Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com
Date: Wed, August 24, 2011 6:37 pm
To: talk-us@openstreetmap.org
On 8/24/2011 6:25 PM, Craig Hinners wrote:
FWIW, I agree with all of Jason's suggestions, below, for the
relation-level network tag
Reminds me of when, on the first day of a new job, I accepted a ride withmy new co-workerto join others at the traditional "lunch with the new guy". He didn't know the way to the restaurant, but I did,having checked OSM prior to leaving.No matter, he insisted on obeying his GPS and ignoring me. I
So it's clear from the responses thatthere are differing needs here:
Due to regional differences, displaying the two-letter USPS code in the shield is not necessarily desirable. For example, there are states where "SR" is more easily understood.
At the conceptual level, the same string should not
Sure, relations get you an additional degree of normalization. And using relations to carry route/network tags gets the job done, granted. But at what cost?I've yet to hear a convincing argument that justifies the additional complexity of relations as they are being championed as carriers of
[The "rich key" methodology] still can't handle ways that are part of more than one route (e.g. situations like the I-580, I-80 overlap are actually fairly common).It can, usingsemicolon-delimited values. Your example becomes:highway:network:us:interstate=580;80As an aside, if OSM didn't have the
The only thing that relations add (in terms of tagging) is an order of magnitude of complexity.There is no technical reason why direct application of tags to ways can't work. However, this requires the use of highly-specific tag keys, such as a unique key for interstate highways, a unique key for
From: Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org
Perhaps Richard could shed some more light on this, but relations are
pretty much going to be necessary to properly render route shields given
the huge variety in highway networks in North America and the world.
My company has a beta version of a
From: Kevin Atkinson ke...@atkinson.dhs.org
If a stretch of road has multiple numbered route, a semi-colon
should be used to separate them and I believe that the render _will_
recognize those.
In my experience, Mapnik renders the semicolon as-is, rather than
creating a shield/marker for each
From: Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com
There's been no standard way of tagging state highways since before I
joined at the beginning of this year.
Nor has there been in my four years here. Hell, I was the one who wrote
the wiki suggestion to use the USPS state abbreviations. I am completely
This is a three minute video on, mostly, maps and addresses. Probably applies
to boundaries too. http://sivers.org/jaddr
Interesting. Although, I don't know what it is, but TED speakers always
manage to creep me out and sound supremely sanctimonious, no matter how
enlightening their subject
19 matches
Mail list logo
