Re: [Talk-us] Improving coverage of exit numbers and destinations on motorways

So, I am confused here. What Paul is talking about, isn't that what is being proposed (besides the junction:ref bit)? This is a proposal to use the node and way approach, like the one Duane points too, right? On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 10:31 AM Duane Gearhart wrote: > Hey all, >

Re: [Talk-us] Improving coverage of exit numbers and destinations on motorways

On 5/4/2016 4:18 AM, Greg Morgan wrote: At one time there was a discussion on the list about moving exit_to tags as destination tags on the ramp. I moved most of the exit_to tags that I mapped to the ramps. Here you are proposing something different by leaving some exit_to tags and adding

Re: [Talk-us] Improving coverage of exit numbers and destinations on motorways

On Wed, May 4, 2016 at 3:18 AM, Greg Morgan wrote: > > > The work flow that you mention drive me batty.[0] At one time there was a > discussion on the list about moving exit_to tags as destination tags on the > ramp. I moved most of the exit_to tags that I mapped to the

Re: [Talk-us] Improving coverage of exit numbers and destinations on motorways

On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 2:46 AM, Jinal Foflia wrote: > There has been a recent push to improve the coverage of exit numbers and > destination signs on the motorways in the US by the data team at Mapbox. > Some context here [1][2][3][4]. The primary sources of data were DoT

Re: [Talk-us] Improving coverage of exit numbers and destinations on motorways

Hey all, I believe the way-junction:ref should be used in addition to the node-ref only when needed at splits - like this example: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Exit_Info#A.2FB_Split_Example These types of splits do not happen very often - however, when they do - having the way-junction:ref

Re: [Talk-us] Improving coverage of exit numbers and destinations on motorways

Hi Paul, These are good points, but it does not look like the `junction:ref` tagging scheme is very common. Till there is widespread usage by the community we will continue to follow the conventional tagging of the reference numbers on the motorway_junction node [1]. Curious to know what the

Re: [Talk-us] Improving coverage of exit numbers and destinations on motorways

I'm wondering why the push to tag a node with directional information when tagging the first segment of the diverging way would be more concise and already had support in some navigational data consumers? This handles weird situations where ramps diverge to the left or from a lane other than the

[Talk-us] Improving coverage of exit numbers and destinations on motorways

There has been a recent push to improve the coverage of exit numbers and destination signs on the motorways in the US by the data team at Mapbox. Some context here [1][2][3][4]. The primary sources of data were DoT documents and Mapillary images. The secondary source was Wikipedia, but as per the