That seems sensible. What about the general case (i.e. no continuity with a county road?) - to add "road" or not?
On 2020/07/30 7:09, Paul Johnson wrote: > I'd generally include the whole name including "Road" in that case. > > On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 5:03 PM <tj-osmw...@lowsnr.net > <mailto:tj-osmw...@lowsnr.net>> wrote: > > Quick question for clarification. > > The US Forest Roads overlay in JOSM shows the name of forest roads > without "Road"; e.g. "Burton Creek B". Should the suffix "road" be added > or is it redundant and a waste of bytes? (Sometimes there may be > continuity from, say, a County Road with e.g. "Burton Creek Road", > though.) > > Mark. > > On 2020/07/30 2:55, Paul Johnson wrote: > > Alright, I think we have a consensus forming. Someone want to update > > the wiki? > > > > On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 12:30 PM Evin Fairchild > <evindf...@gmail.com <mailto:evindf...@gmail.com> > > <mailto:evindf...@gmail.com <mailto:evindf...@gmail.com>>> wrote: > > > > I'm also in favor of this change. It's a route number, so it only > > should be in the ref tag. This will make Forest service roads more > > consistent with other numbered routes. Even though most, if > not all, > > Forest service roads don't have a name but just a number, I > still am > > in favor of this. I was a bit surprised that the wiki was > saying to > > keep the road number in the name. > > > > In fact, the names that most of these forest service roads have > > don't even match common parlance. Most people refer to them as > > "Forest Service Road XX" whereas the TIGER import called them > > "National Forest Development Road XX," which might be the official > > name, but not the most common name. > > > > -Evin > > > > > > On Wed, Jul 29, 2020, 6:47 AM Mike Thompson > <miketh...@gmail.com <mailto:miketh...@gmail.com> > > <mailto:miketh...@gmail.com <mailto:miketh...@gmail.com>>> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jul 28, 2020 at 1:33 PM Paul Johnson > > <ba...@ursamundi.org <mailto:ba...@ursamundi.org> > <mailto:ba...@ursamundi.org <mailto:ba...@ursamundi.org>>> wrote: > > > > > > > > Could we get the US Road Tagging page updated to reflect > > common name practice instead of encouraging the > duplication > > of the ref in the name? Or is that going to spark drama? > > > > I am in favor of the change. The name tag should be for the > > name only. > > > > Mike > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Talk-us mailing list > > Talk-us@openstreetmap.org > <mailto:Talk-us@openstreetmap.org> <mailto:Talk-us@openstreetmap.org > <mailto:Talk-us@openstreetmap.org>> > > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Talk-us mailing list > > Talk-us@openstreetmap.org <mailto:Talk-us@openstreetmap.org> > > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-us mailing list > Talk-us@openstreetmap.org <mailto: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
