On Sun, Dec 18, 2016 at 3:40 PM, Edwin Smith <e.smit...@ymail.com> wrote:
> Hi all, > There is a disagreement that could use a few more eyes. Destination has > the explicit purpose of telling a > navigation program the wording of a sign. It is typically used as a tag > of a Motorway Link. It is not visible > in the Mapnik in any way. > > One side of the disagreement argues that if an abbreviation appears on the > sign (Ave for instance) > it should be expanded to Avenue in the Destination Tag. The arguments are: > 1) OpenStreetMap discourages abbreviations > 2) If you search through Destinations every time Avenue appears it is a > mapper vote for expanding Ave to > Avenue. > I'd go with the intended phrase, not the abbreviation, same as we do now for name=*. > The other side of the disagreement (which I support) argues to present the > sign to the navigation program > exactly as it appears, neither abbreviating or expanding abbreviations. > The arguments are: > 1) Destination is for the use of the navigation program. If abbreviations > are changed it has no way to > know if the sign says Ave or Avenue. If they are unchanged it can make > its own decision as to what use > of abbreviations is best for its users. > 2) It is just wrong to count every Avenue as a mapper vote for expanding > Ave because it very often is > just the mapper's correct reporting that the sign has Avenue spelled out. > This is just pedantic. Maybe destination:transcription=* for literal strings if it's that huge of a thing? Most humans are going to be listening for the prompts anyway and aren't going to be bothered by a difference between the literal string and the intended phrase on the screen. If you're shooting to rebuild sign assemblies for display, you're probably better off creating a series of SVG's for your specific application.
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk