On Sat, 2010-10-23 at 06:30 -0700, Craig Hinners wrote: > [...] (Or, if you're of the brevity and ambiguity trumps verbosity and clarity > camp, I give you "network:US:WI", "network:US:US", "network:US:I".) > [...] > No endless parsing of the tag value, looking for "I-" to determine > whether that way is an interstate, oh, oops, this guy doesn't like > hyphens, I need to look for "I*", oh, oops, that gets me everything for > Iowa and Idaho, oops, now my function to determine whether a way is an > interstate is 10000 lines long with 500 "if" statements and regular > expressions that would make a CS major run for the hills.
No, it's very easy. Colons separate fields, and non-alphanumerics separate subfields. Fields are arranged from highest level administrative level, starting with ISO two-letter country codes. Everything before the last subfield is used to determine the shield to use. Look at these for example: Ref: Shield Number US:I-15 US:I 15 US:US-89 US:US 89 US:UT:67 US:UT 67 US:UT:SR-67 US:UT:SR 67 US:UT:CR-1983 US:UT:CR 1983 US:NH:3A US:NH 3A If people don't use the country reference, then it will be more difficult to figure out which shield to use, but these could be tagged and fixed manually. The bigger problem is rendering the shield so that it is clearly readable. Another problem will be making state-specific shields that can be clearly rendered. Something that could be done is that the basic shields will be made manually. The numbers would also be done manually or they become fuzzy at small sizes. The shields and the digits would be put together by a program, so the complete shield would be made by computer. The big map providers (Google, Yahoo, Bing, MapQuest, etc.) should be considered a floor (minimum) for OSM rendering, not a ceiling. - Val - _______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us