On 8/24/2011 6:25 PM, Craig Hinners wrote:
FWIW, I agree with all of Jason's suggestions, below, for the
relation-level "network" tag values. It mirrors my thinking on the
matter exactly.
I disagree with putting alternate and business in the network. These
modifiers are part of the designation, and some states (Arkansas in
particular) treat them as lettered suffixes rather than separate plates.
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Use of ref-tag on state highways
From: Jason Straub <strau...@yahoo.com <mailto:strau...@yahoo.com>>
Date: Wed, August 24, 2011 3:37 pm
To: "talk-us@openstreetmap.org <mailto:talk-us@openstreetmap.org>"
<talk-us@openstreetmap.org <mailto:talk-us@openstreetmap.org>>
As the person that just got done labelling each TX state highway,
I'll chime in here with some comments.
For the network tag, I think that the labelling should be (country :
state network : network within the state : subnetwork in state),
while the ref is JUST the number for that highway. So:
US:I -> Interstate
US:I:BUS -> Business Interstate
US:US -> US Route
US:US:BUS -> Business US Route
US:US:ALT:BUS -> Business Alt US Route
US:TX -> Texas State Highway
US:TX:FM -> Farm to Market
US:TX:RM -> Ranch To Market
US:TX:FM:Bus -> Business Farm to Market
_______________________________________________
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
