On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 6:26 PM, Michal Migurski <m...@stamen.com> 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 > > The associated code: > https://gist.github.com/3915267
Reviewing a diff, I see pretty much all of the relations I have created are unchanged soo... looks great! :) More seriously, I do like the idea of having the county name in there for county roads. But I haven't done any county routes myself yet so my opinions are not particularly strong. Looking at the diff visually I see a lot of either moving modifiers to their own tag or removing the duplicated modifier from the network tag. I guess the question there is, should the various loops, bypasses, truck routes, etc be considered as part of the same network as the unmodified highway. For example if I do a tag query for network=US:I and ref=376, should it return the business route as well as the base US 376 route? Toby _______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
