On 10 Jun 2009, at 18:43 , Paul Johnson wrote: > Richard Mann wrote: >> This is a request for comments on the proposal for a new >> Key:designation. Hopefully it's had it's rough edges removed already, >> but I would appreciate your comments. >> >> Richard >> >> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Designation > > I'm opposed; this seems like a duplication of effort for what route > relations are currently for, and creates redundancy and overlap in > scope > with the service= and highway= tags. As such, this really sounds > like a > step in the wrong direction. Perhaps expanding the service= tags and > getting the mapnik and osmarender we use on the slippymap to render > these things instead of route tags on the underlying ways when the > underlying way is a member of a route=road relation. >
this is clearly the right direction to cleanup the confusing mix of features on ground and a legal designation not seen on ground there is no overlap at all. these are 2 entirely different things and tagging them independent makes sense. just read the discussion about US road tagging in the wiki and you will see how important it is to have them independent. > The cyclemap is getting this right; but strangely, none of the other > renderers. And it's not like it would be that hard to get that fixed; > someone's already rendering road relations complete with correct > highway > badges already. > > http://weait.com/maps/?zoom=11&lat=43.14469&lon=-79.17383&layers=0B0 > > > _______________________________________________ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
