Toby Murray <toby.mur...@gmail.com> writes: > On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 12:43 AM, Paul Johnson <ba...@ursamundi.org> wrote: >> On 10/25/2010 08:43 AM, Zeke Farwell wrote: >> >>> For Michigan route 12: >>> ref=12 >>> network=state >>> state=michigan >>> >>> For Bennington County route 16 in Vermont: >>> ref=16 >>> network=county >>> state=vermont >>> county=bennington >> >> I like it, though it should be pointed out that this is more difficult >> unless we're talking about route relations. > > I kind of like this system as well. It is clear and easy to > understand. The only problem (as pointed out before) is that it breaks > the network tag compared to the rest of the world. Can we use it > anyway? :)
What about making it "network=US:state" or "network=US:county"? That way it's easy to tell US states apart from states in other countries. Does that ruin its simplicity and elegance? -- Peter Budny \ Georgia Tech \ CS PhD student \ _______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
