it's not a traditional method of doing that, but i do think it could work.
it does also seem to address Paul Johnson's concern about distinguishing some cases.
richard On 10/18/12 9:36 PM, Michal Migurski wrote:
Hi Richard, thanks! The "CR" vs. County name thing is new to me. Another mapper suggested that I replace them with something like this so it's not necessary to know all the county names in order to correctly interpret something as a county route: network=US:NY:CR:Rensselaer Kosher? -mike. On Oct 18, 2012, at 5:16 PM, Richard Welty wrote:the scrubbing looks mostly ok, BUT... i am one of the folks who started out using US:<state>:CR for county route networks, which i now believe was a mistake. we really should be using county names, not CR in the network tag, e.g. network=US:NY:Rensselaer otherwise we can't really tell which county the route is in, and can't distinguish CR 1 in Columbia County from CR 1 in Rensselaer County. richard On 10/18/12 7:26 PM, Michal Migurski wrote:Hi everyone, We're getting ready to do a major data update to the Stamen Terrain layer and I've been working on scrubbing the route relations data from OSM. I've linked to a before and after CSV, processed via Google Refine to normalize networks, refs and modifiers. I'm curious to get some feedback on it: http://mike.teczno.com/img/osm-scrubbed-routes-2012-09.zip_______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us---------------------------------------------------------------- michal migurski- m...@stamen.com 415.558.1610 _______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
_______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
