Lester Caine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb:
> I'm looking at MY area of the map on no-names and thinking - why the
> hell should I go and mark every farm track with something just
> because it's currently highlighted. This is a rural area with a lot
> of tracks.
Marking of farm tracks which have generally have no names was never
planned, I think. Just roads that usually should have a name like
residential streets and for which this fact is tested.
> And the roundabouts are fun as well - I don't want the name because
> it gets displayed but they are then getting flagged as no-name.
Should not the render be able to surpress names in roundabouts if they
are small?
> On one hand I can see the idea of flagging EVERYTHING by default that
> does not have a name, but IS that actually the right rule to follow?
> Do we end up with a vast volume of data that needs sorting just to
> hide something on no-names when it would make more sense to flag when
> something NEEDS a name?
This is an interesting idea, but it requires that people reliably add a
needsname="yes" to roads instead of just omitting the name tag when
they do not not the name. Otherwise there is no way picking up the odd
road where someone _forgot_ to put done the name.
It also would not solve the current problem of the noname-test failing
on roads of which it is known that they have no name.
Christoph
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
