This summarizes the approach I take towards this in regards to named or reffed links.
At least until we start consistently expecting tags on entities to apply to those entities instead of a completely different entity. Adding ref to ways instead of the relation that describes the route is redundant at best and making editing and rendering support worse. On Tue, Jul 3, 2018, 12:34 Evin Fairchild <evindf...@gmail.com> wrote: > There are some cases where naming link roads makes sense. For example, I > tag the roads coming out of roundabouts as link roads (especially if it's > something like a residential road intersecting, a note important road like > a secondary road, and I tag the slip roads for that leg of the roundabout > as secondary_link), and it is pretty helpful for routing purposes to name > the link roads in that case. Also helpful if the link roads represent a > RIRO (right-in, right-out) intersection. > > -Evin (compdude) > > On Tue, Jul 3, 2018, 9:28 AM OSM Volunteer stevea < > stevea...@softworkers.com> wrote: > >> While I don't have "a dog in this fight," I also read our wiki which says >> "Link roads NORMALLY do not have names." (Emphasis mine). In the unusual >> (abnormal?) cases where they do (and I trust Paul wouldn't have added them >> unless they do), there is no contradiction with our wiki, rather an unusual >> case which isn't "normal." In my opinion, that's OK. >> >> We should follow what our wiki says, in this case it leave a bit of >> "wiggle room" to name a link road. Paul has named some link roads where it >> appears they do have such names in the real world, and I see no >> inconsistency. >> >> Sometimes a datum in OSM will LACK all the tags it should, because some >> are not known. That's not great, but it's OK: mappers who come along >> later can add these (and improve this and other features in our map), this >> is called "growing our map." Sometimes an ADDITIONAL datum exists in the >> real world and is added to a feature even when this is unusual (though not >> incorrect) as many other similar data do not have this additional datum. >> That's OK; I see no inconsistency. >> >> Our wiki strives to hit the sweet spot of accommodating what is in the >> real world and how we should tag such data in our map. It is a guide, not >> absolutely strict doctrine. I say this because we have "plastic tagging" >> that encourages us to tag accurately while allowing flexibility. >> Especially in early versions, we may not always write our wiki as 100% >> correct, and so wikis grow, change and evolve to accomplish this. If the >> wiki needs updating to note that unusually, but in certain parts of the >> world, link roads sometimes get names, I encourage you to update it: we'll >> all benefit. >> >> Writing/contributing to wiki is easy, though it can be tricky: you want >> to channel consensus without being too strictly doctrinaire in a direction >> which would hobble contributions or just plain encourage/teach others to >> enter them wrongly. It is meant to guide us, not preach to us as an >> absolute. Where it is wrong, or one or more believe it wrong or >> out-of-date with real world data, please use the Discussion page built into >> each wiki to discuss with others any potential changes to existing wiki. >> The "right thing" (better written wiki) usually happens soon after such >> discussion. >> >> SteveA >> California >> OSM Volunteer since 2009 and serious contributor to not only our map's >> data, but our wiki, too >> _______________________________________________ >> Talk-us mailing list >> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us >> > _______________________________________________ > Talk-us mailing list > Talk-us@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us >
_______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
