* Richard Weait <rich...@weait.com> [2012-03-13 10:30 -0400]: > adding a tag for banner=Alternate/Business/Truck is my least-favourite > option of those above.
Why? > increasing specificity on the network tag like network=US:US:Alt > follows the original intent of the network tag. It also offers the > least surprise to naive consumers of the data. So you get the reverse questions from NE2. };> We (so far) mostly use the network tag as a hierarchy of ownership, not containment: the US:MD network is for Maryland's roads and Maryland is in the US, but its roads are not members of the "US" network. Does it make sense to double up on the meanings of network tags, so that, say, US:NJ:Business would be a business route that's a member of the New Jersey state highway network, but US:NJ:CR would be a county road that's not a member of the state network? Is it still easier for data consumers if they have to differentiate between those two cases? Compared to the scenario where we add a modifier tag for special routes, data consumers already have to consider two tags to work with route relations. Would adding a third make a difference? -- ...computer contrarian of the first order... / http://aperiodic.net/phil/ PGP: 026A27F2 print: D200 5BDB FC4B B24A 9248 9F7A 4322 2D22 026A 27F2 --- -- Frederick! He's eating a screw! -- "Eat-Man '98" ---- --- -- _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
