On 10/26/2010 07:33 AM, Mike N. wrote: >> I like the idea of putting the immediately-connected road in the exit_to= >> tag and leaving the rest of the sign's text to destination sign >> relations. >> I fully agree that some people's current practice (including mine in the >> past) makes for a very clittered map and needs improvement. > > Interstate exit signs are carefully chosen for clarity - using only the > immediately-connected road in exit_to can result in a situation such > Tulsa, OK where Skelly Drive parallels I44, and there would be many > exits with an immediate link to Skelly Drive: > http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=36.0895&lon=-95.95508&zoom=16&layers=M > - totally confusing someone who uses that information.
I can't think of any of those exits offhand that are actually posted as Skelly Drive. If I recall correctly (given that I'm trying to avoid taking I44 as much as work lets me thanks to ODOT detouring I-44 to Skelly Drive), none of the exits are called "Skelly Drive," but instead the next cross street after the ramp. > Sign relations are less ambiguous, but there is no editor assistance. > In many cases, a destination city on a sign will be hundreds of KM > distant, which again complicates trying to locate the object to add to > the sign relation. Such as taking US-64 eastbound in South Tulsa. At Creek Turnpike, the guide sign says "West / Oklahoma City." A more extreme example is in The Dalles, Oregon, where you have signs pointing out Boise.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
