On Sat, Jun 6, 2020 at 3:24 PM brad <bradha...@fastmail.com> wrote: > On 6/6/20 9:24 AM, Paul Johnson wrote: > > On Sat, Jun 6, 2020 at 8:24 AM Mike Thompson <miketh...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> ref: >> The wiki states that these should be ref=FR + <what is on the sign>. In >> practice: >> * ref:usfs=FS + <what is on the sign> >> * ref=FS + <what is on the sign> >> Most of the changesets that added a "ref:usfs" tag include a very helpful >> comment that this issue was discussed on the tagging list at sometime in >> the past and that this was the consensus, e.g. [2]. If this continues to >> be the consensus, can we change the wiki? >> >> > ref=FS <what's on the sign> > > Ultimately consider adding a route relation with network=US:NSFR:Forest > Name:FH/FR as well so we can finally kill off route tagging on things that > are not routes. Not sure we really need the FH/FR distinction, however, > since within the same forest, they're all the same network: The 2 digit > routes are major, the 3 digits are minor (like parking lots and > campgrounds) and the 4 digits are usually only usable by log trucks and > 4x4s. Trails are another matter. > > I prefer ref=FS xxx too. I think the tagging discussion that suggested > ref:usfs was using that for the route relation. >
Why would that even be necessary to have a ref:usfs subkey on a route relation, though? It's already in the NFSR network.
_______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
