roads with many names

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
29 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

roads with many names

Rob Savoye
  Where I live in rural Colorado, many of the roads have 3 names. The
county designated one like "CR 2", but often have an alternate name
everyone uses like "Corkscrew Gulch Road", and then many have a US
Forest Service designation like "FS 729.2B". I usually use the common
name as the 'name' tag, and the USFS designation as the 'alt_name' tag.
I kindof would like to include the county name as well. I do see a lot
of roads use 'name_1', but that gets flagged often by validation. So my
question is, how to I tag all three road names appropriately ?

  As a fire-fighter, all 3 names get used all depending on there the
incident report comes from, so we need to know them all. Us old
responders of course know everywhere, but I'm trying to help the new
generation in our department be effective in our huge remote district,
cause we're all retiring...

  Minor note. All of our fire apparatus have a 10" Android tablet
mounted to the dash that runs OsmAnd (of course), and we use offline
navigation heavily, which is where the road names become important.
Using Open Data has decreased our response time, and on occasion, saved
somebody's life.

        - rob -

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: roads with many names

Paul Allen
On Sun, 18 Aug 2019 at 16:17, Rob Savoye <[hidden email]> wrote:
  Where I live in rural Colorado, many of the roads have 3 names. The
county designated one like "CR 2", but often have an alternate name
everyone uses like "Corkscrew Gulch Road", and then many have a US
Forest Service designation like "FS 729.2B". I usually use the common
name as the 'name' tag, and the USFS designation as the 'alt_name' tag.
I kindof would like to include the county name as well. I do see a lot
of roads use 'name_1', but that gets flagged often by validation. So my
question is, how to I tag all three road names appropriately ?

Assuming that "CR 2" is a name and not a ref, one possibility that springs to mind,
and which will no doubt be highly controversial is

    name=CR 2 / Corkscrew Gulch Road / FS 729.2B
    alt_name=CR 2; Corkscrew Gulch Road; FS 729.2B

Ugly and probably breaks many explicit and implicit rules.  You'll no doubt find out
all the ways it is a bad idea very shortly.

--
Paul


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: roads with many names

Julien djakk
In reply to this post by Rob Savoye
Hello Rob !

If you have several name or several ref, you can use the “;” separator 

Julien “djakk”


Le dim. 18 août 2019 à 17:17, Rob Savoye <[hidden email]> a écrit :
  Where I live in rural Colorado, many of the roads have 3 names. The
county designated one like "CR 2", but often have an alternate name
everyone uses like "Corkscrew Gulch Road", and then many have a US
Forest Service designation like "FS 729.2B". I usually use the common
name as the 'name' tag, and the USFS designation as the 'alt_name' tag.
I kindof would like to include the county name as well. I do see a lot
of roads use 'name_1', but that gets flagged often by validation. So my
question is, how to I tag all three road names appropriately ?

  As a fire-fighter, all 3 names get used all depending on there the
incident report comes from, so we need to know them all. Us old
responders of course know everywhere, but I'm trying to help the new
generation in our department be effective in our huge remote district,
cause we're all retiring...

  Minor note. All of our fire apparatus have a 10" Android tablet
mounted to the dash that runs OsmAnd (of course), and we use offline
navigation heavily, which is where the road names become important.
Using Open Data has decreased our response time, and on occasion, saved
somebody's life.

        - rob -

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: roads with many names

Rob Savoye
In reply to this post by Paul Allen
On 8/18/19 9:41 AM, Paul Allen wrote:

> Assuming that "CR 2" is a name and not a ref, one possibility that
> springs to mind, and which will no doubt be highly controversial is

  Yes, it's county designated name. It's gets messier than that, as
sometimes "CR 2" might include multiple other road segments, all with
different names common and USFS names. We prefer the common name or the
USFS name, but I have no control over what Dispatch gives us.

> name=CR 2 / Corkscrew Gulch Road / FS 729.2B alt_name=CR 2; Corkscrew
> Gulch Road; FS 729.2B

> If you have several name or several ref, you can use the “;”
> separator
  Ah, I've used that elsewhere, didn't think about it for road names.
The problem though is since the name gets displayed, too many long road
names obscures the map. I've had similar problems with house addresses
in the more densely populated areas. When I produce a KML file from OSM
data, I put all the names in the description popup. That works in GPS
map apps, but not in OsmAnd. Plus I wonder if that would break routing...

        - rob -

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: roads with many names

Joseph Eisenberg
It looks like "CR 2" is a "ref" rather than a name, and so is FS
729.2B. A ref=, short for "reference number" (or more properly
"reference alphanumeric string") is a set of letters and numbers that
identifies a feature.

While it's best to have the common name in the tag name=, like
name=Corkscrew Gulch Road, it's okay to have more than one ref in the
tag ref, separated by semicolons. Many database users can handle this.
Eg:

name=Corkscrew Gulch Road
ref=CR 2;FS 729.2B

If there are other, less common actual names, consider using
alt_name=* or loc_name=* (local, informal names), but in this case it
looks like there is just one name, but multiple reference numbers.

Joseph

On 8/19/19, Rob Savoye <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 8/18/19 9:41 AM, Paul Allen wrote:
>
>> Assuming that "CR 2" is a name and not a ref, one possibility that
>> springs to mind, and which will no doubt be highly controversial is
>
>   Yes, it's county designated name. It's gets messier than that, as
> sometimes "CR 2" might include multiple other road segments, all with
> different names common and USFS names. We prefer the common name or the
> USFS name, but I have no control over what Dispatch gives us.
>
>> name=CR 2 / Corkscrew Gulch Road / FS 729.2B alt_name=CR 2; Corkscrew
>> Gulch Road; FS 729.2B
>
>> If you have several name or several ref, you can use the “;”
>> separator
>   Ah, I've used that elsewhere, didn't think about it for road names.
> The problem though is since the name gets displayed, too many long road
> names obscures the map. I've had similar problems with house addresses
> in the more densely populated areas. When I produce a KML file from OSM
> data, I put all the names in the description popup. That works in GPS
> map apps, but not in OsmAnd. Plus I wonder if that would break routing...
>
> - rob -
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: roads with many names

Richard Fairhurst
In reply to this post by Rob Savoye
Rob Savoye wrote:
> Where I live in rural Colorado, many of the roads have 3 names.
> The county designated one like "CR 2", but often have an alternate
> name everyone uses like "Corkscrew Gulch Road", and then many
> have a US Forest Service designation like "FS 729.2B".

name=Corkscrew Gulch Road
ref=CR 2
usfs:ref=FS 729.2B

I think this holds even if the "county-designated name" is CR 2. The "name
everyone uses" tallies with OSM standard practice; the official reference is
what we have the ref tag for.

Richard



--
Sent from: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Tagging-f5258744.html

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: roads with many names

Rob Savoye
On 8/18/19 10:27 AM, Richard Fairhurst wrote:

> name=Corkscrew Gulch Road
> ref=CR 2
> usfs:ref=FS 729.2B

  Interesting, I didn't realize "usfs:ref" is a tag. I have used ref for
camp site numbers, didn't know it supported alphanumerics. I dug around,
and don't see usfs:ref being used, at least not anywhere in Colorado.

  I was wondering if using "alt_name" with ';' was a good idea. I guess
the issue for me is how it appears when searching in OsmAnd, which has
been the major gripe. I guess I can change a few obscure roads, and just
see how OsmAnd handles it.

  Where it gets interesting is for an incident on Corkscrew Gulch Road,
Dispatch often uses the USFS designation, cause the call may come from
the forest service. What name gets used depends on who you work for...
Not your problem, many thanks for the input.

> I think this holds even if the "county-designated name" is CR 2. The "name
> everyone uses" tallies with OSM standard practice; the official reference is
> what we have the ref tag for.

  Plus 'name' is usually what any mapping app will put on the display.
OSM has most all these roads already, they just have no tags beyond
"highway=track".

   Minor note to other mappers, we're big into 'smoothness', 'surface',
'tracktype', as we use those to help determine what type of apparatus to
respond in. I usually have to validate that by driving the road,
although the difference between 'bad' and 'very_bad' is very open to a
difference of opinion... (high clearance only is what I use for
very_bad) But anyway, thank you all for good metadata!

        - rob -

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: roads with many names

Johnparis
Normally it would be "ref:usfs" rather than "usfs:ref".

I frequently use tags like "ref:FR:STIF" where STIF is an agreed tag within FR (France).  

And yes, the main ref for the cited road would be "ref=CR 2". Included spaces in a ref tag vary by local consensus. Some places might use "ref=CR2". If there are signs and they are consistent I'd use that.





On Sun, Aug 18, 2019, 18:53 Rob Savoye <[hidden email]> wrote:
On 8/18/19 10:27 AM, Richard Fairhurst wrote:

> name=Corkscrew Gulch Road
> ref=CR 2
> usfs:ref=FS 729.2B

  Interesting, I didn't realize "usfs:ref" is a tag. I have used ref for
camp site numbers, didn't know it supported alphanumerics. I dug around,
and don't see usfs:ref being used, at least not anywhere in Colorado.

  I was wondering if using "alt_name" with ';' was a good idea. I guess
the issue for me is how it appears when searching in OsmAnd, which has
been the major gripe. I guess I can change a few obscure roads, and just
see how OsmAnd handles it.

  Where it gets interesting is for an incident on Corkscrew Gulch Road,
Dispatch often uses the USFS designation, cause the call may come from
the forest service. What name gets used depends on who you work for...
Not your problem, many thanks for the input.

> I think this holds even if the "county-designated name" is CR 2. The "name
> everyone uses" tallies with OSM standard practice; the official reference is
> what we have the ref tag for.

  Plus 'name' is usually what any mapping app will put on the display.
OSM has most all these roads already, they just have no tags beyond
"highway=track".

   Minor note to other mappers, we're big into 'smoothness', 'surface',
'tracktype', as we use those to help determine what type of apparatus to
respond in. I usually have to validate that by driving the road,
although the difference between 'bad' and 'very_bad' is very open to a
difference of opinion... (high clearance only is what I use for
very_bad) But anyway, thank you all for good metadata!

        - rob -

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: roads with many names

Rob Savoye
On 8/18/19 11:09 AM, Johnparis wrote:
> Normally it would be "ref:usfs" rather than "usfs:ref".

  Thanks, I just found the ref=* page. Also noticed 'loc_name' and
'nat_name', and it looks like those plus ref* are used for routing.
Anyway, I like the ref:usfs tag, and will use that, and ref= for the
county designation.

> And yes, the main ref for the cited road would be "ref=CR 2". Included
> spaces in a ref tag vary by local consensus. Some places might use
> "ref=CR2". If there are signs and they are consistent I'd use that.

  Since I usually validate by truck, I use whatever the street sign
says, since that's what the driver uses. A few weeks ago we were at a
structure fire and a local had put up his own road sign, but with the
wrong name! We decided to trust our map, which worked great. I had used
used the actual common name, and put the bad sign in a 'note'. Note
really sure how to handle that...

        - rob -

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: roads with many names

Paul Allen
On Sun, 18 Aug 2019 at 18:29, Rob Savoye <[hidden email]> wrote:

  Since I usually validate by truck, I use whatever the street sign
says, since that's what the driver uses. A few weeks ago we were at a
structure fire and a local had put up his own road sign, but with the
wrong name! We decided to trust our map, which worked great. I had used
used the actual common name, and put the bad sign in a 'note'. Note
really sure how to handle that...

If the owner calls in a fire at his house, he's going to use his own wrong name
for the road.  So you'd probably be best to have it as a loc_name, then there's
a chance of somebody other than you finding it.

OTOH, if you want to make sure mappers know it's not the name of the road no matter
what that guy says, then not:name=*.

Having it as both a loc_name and a not:name feels wrong, but a loc_name with a note
saying only one guy on the entire planet calls it that would work.

--
Paul


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: roads with many names

dieterdreist
In reply to this post by Paul Allen


sent from a phone

> On 18. Aug 2019, at 17:41, Paul Allen <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Ugly and probably breaks many explicit and implicit rules.  You'll no doubt find out
> all the ways it is a bad idea very shortly.



for several names it is common to use variations of the name tag, like alt_name reg_name etc.

cheers,
Martin
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: roads with many names

Rob Savoye
In reply to this post by Paul Allen
On 8/18/19 12:24 PM, Paul Allen wrote:

> If the owner calls in a fire at his house, he's going to use his own
> wrong name for the road.  So you'd probably be best to have it as a loc_name, then
> there's a chance of somebody other than you finding it.

  Luckily a neighbor called it in, he wasn't home. using 'loc_name' or
'alt_name' makes sense. This entire area doesn't even exist in Google
Maps, so people not using OSM couldn't find it till we gave directions
on the radio.

> with a note saying only one guy on the entire planet calls it that would work.

  Him and UPS. :-)

        - rob -

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: roads with many names

dieterdreist


sent from a phone

> On 18. Aug 2019, at 20:36, Rob Savoye <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Luckily a neighbor called it in, he wasn't home. using 'loc_name' or
> 'alt_name' makes sense. This entire area doesn't even exist in Google
> Maps, so people not using OSM couldn't find it till we gave directions
> on the radio.


names in OSM are usually in natural language, CR2 is probably what OpenStreetMap calls a ref, which is for numbers and alphanumeric codes. The other name is also looking like a code, I agree with Richard’s suggestion to use one name and 2 refs for your example.


Cheers Martin
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: roads with many names

Paul Allen
In reply to this post by dieterdreist
On Sun, 18 Aug 2019 at 19:33, Martin Koppenhoefer <[hidden email]> wrote:


for several names it is common to use variations of the name tag, like alt_name reg_name etc.

Yep.  And in many cases those, along with loc_name, may be the best way to handle it.  But
only name (and ref, if used) get rendered by some carto systems.  In the situation described,
it might be useful to abuse/misuse name a little.  Technically, name=A;B is valid, but
semi-colons can be hard to make out, so name = A / B might be preferred by some (and
castigated by others).  Repeating those names with alt_name=A;B means that some
search facilities will be able to locate both names.

I think I have a comparable situation in my town.  I've yet to investigate more fully, but it
appears there are a couple of residential roads where the official address for houses
on one side is A Street and for houses on the other side is B Avenue.  Yes, I know about
name:left and name:right, but they don't help somebody scanning the map for B Avenue
if it's rendered as A Street.  I'm hoping I've misunderstood the situation and further
investigation will show that isn't the case, but I'm not hopeful.

Real life is messy. :(

--
Paul


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: roads with many names

Rob Savoye
In reply to this post by dieterdreist
On 8/18/19 12:42 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:

> names in OSM are usually in natural language, CR2 is probably what
> OpenStreetMap calls a ref, which is for numbers and alphanumeric
> codes. The other name is also looking like a code, I agree with
> Richard’s suggestion to use one name and 2 refs for your example.
  So no space ? USFS roads use "FS " with a space, at least that seems
to be common. So should those be "FS739.1A' ? I agree on one name and 2
refs. County road names in 'ref' and USFS names in 'ref:usfs'. I can see
I have a long editing session coming up...

  Another fun one is you can buy road signs on ebay, so another road in
that area was 'Aspen Road' according to the county, but the sign says
'Aspen Lane', cause it was in stock. :-) I made that an 'alt_name'.
After the fire was out, I had fun talking to the neighbors to try to
make sense of it all. My fire department would be so screwed without our
ability to improve our own maps.

        - rob -

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: roads with many names

Paul Allen
On Sun, 18 Aug 2019 at 19:55, Rob Savoye <[hidden email]> wrote:
  So no space ? USFS roads use "FS " with a space, at least that seems
to be common. So should those be "FS739.1A' ?

My opinion is "paint the label."  Others disagree.  Make up your own mind which
is better.

--
Paul


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: roads with many names

Kevin Kenny-3
In reply to this post by Richard Fairhurst
On Sun, Aug 18, 2019 at 12:28 PM Richard Fairhurst <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Rob Savoye wrote:
> > Where I live in rural Colorado, many of the roads have 3 names.
> > The county designated one like "CR 2", but often have an alternate
> > name everyone uses like "Corkscrew Gulch Road", and then many
> > have a US Forest Service designation like "FS 729.2B".
>
> name=Corkscrew Gulch Road
> ref=CR 2
> usfs:ref=FS 729.2B
>
> I think this holds even if the "county-designated name" is CR 2. The "name
> everyone uses" tallies with OSM standard practice; the official reference is
> what we have the ref tag for.

If there are overlaid refs (and even if there aren't) it's better
North American practice to create route relations for the numbered
routes. That also lets the 'ref' be associated with a 'network', so
that a more sophisticated renderer can get the shields right.  Note
that 'CR' is NOT enough information for a shield - if you look at
https://kbk.is-a-geek.net/catskills/test4.html?la=41.9474&lo=-74.9127&z=14,
you'll see that Bergen County 3/89 have a style of shield distinct
from Passaic County 677.

Simple examples of concurrencies at
https://kbk.is-a-geek.net/catskills/test4.html?la=44.2134&lo=-73.5966&z=15,
where Court Street is US 9 and NY 9N through the village, or
https://kbk.is-a-geek.net/catskills/test4.html?la=41.9474&lo=-74.9127&z=14
where I-890 is concurrent with NY 7 for a couple of exits.

Obviouisly, arbitrary combinations of network are possible, as at
https://kbk.is-a-geek.net/catskills/test4.html?la=41.9474&lo=-74.9127&z=14
where NY 206 shares its roadway with first Sullivan County 179, then
Sullivan County 91, then Delaware County 7, or
https://kbk.is-a-geek.net/catskills/test4.html?la=41.9474&lo=-74.9127&z=14,
where US 202 is concurrent with US 1A and Maine 9 on Main Street, and
then concurrent with I-395 and Maine 15 on the freeway.

It's best to avoid CR as the network in favour of a string like
US:NY:Delaware. It's a bad assumption to guess that a renderer could
deduce this from the borders of the administrative regions.  Nearly
the whole of NY 120A is in Connecticut
https://kbk.is-a-geek.net/catskills/test4.html?la=41.9474&lo=-74.9127&z=14.

Having the route available also helps sort out the directions in the
signage, as where the eastbound direction of the bridge at
https://kbk.is-a-geek.net/catskills/test4.html?la=41.9474&lo=-74.9127&z=14
is NY 30 North and NY 145 South.

The recommended network for USFS numbered routes is US:NFSR:(name of
the forest):NFH for a National Forest Highway, or US:NFSR:(name of the
forest):NFR for a National Forest Road. If the renderer that I've been
linking to in this message gets one of those (or just USFS for the
network, but the same numbers can be reused many times, so it's better
to have the forest included), it'll produce a shield that looks like
https://kbk.is-a-geek.net/attachments/20190818/nfsr2336.png.

If a road has no name other than its ref, practices differ between
putting in noname=yes, just leaving the name off, and giving it a name
like 'State Highway 9'. I tend to prefer the last of these, since a
renderer that doesn't have any fallback for ways without a name will
still at least render something. I also don't disturb 'ref=*' on the
way when I'm creating a route relation, but when doing rendering of
shaped shields, I ignore 'ref=*' entirely on ways that participate in
route relations.

If possible, (borrowing from another thread), keep the ways in a route
relation sorted. (If you or your editor can't do that, I'll cope, but
it makes matters easier for data consumers.)

These practices are seldom necessary in Europe, where route
concurrencies are rare, and pictorial markers are not important. They
are controversial for the rendering of the main map, because the
requirement is specific to a single locale, and because it is foreseen
to have an adverse impact on server operations when scaled up to
planetary size with minutely updates. I work on the issue of route
rendering off and on, but it's a hobby task so my progress is
agonizingly slow.

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: roads with many names

Joseph Eisenberg
Slightly off-topic: one of the posts mentioned that this road is tagged highway=track.

However, if the road is the main access to a house, it should be highway=unclassified. Or it could even be highway=tertiary since it is a country road, if it connects to a number of houses or a hamlet or place=village along the way.

But please add surface=unpaved or a more specific value.

Joseph

On Mon, Aug 19, 2019 at 4:49 AM Kevin Kenny <[hidden email]> wrote:
On Sun, Aug 18, 2019 at 12:28 PM Richard Fairhurst <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Rob Savoye wrote:
> > Where I live in rural Colorado, many of the roads have 3 names.
> > The county designated one like "CR 2", but often have an alternate
> > name everyone uses like "Corkscrew Gulch Road", and then many
> > have a US Forest Service designation like "FS 729.2B".
>
> name=Corkscrew Gulch Road
> ref=CR 2
> usfs:ref=FS 729.2B
>
> I think this holds even if the "county-designated name" is CR 2. The "name
> everyone uses" tallies with OSM standard practice; the official reference is
> what we have the ref tag for.

If there are overlaid refs (and even if there aren't) it's better
North American practice to create route relations for the numbered
routes. That also lets the 'ref' be associated with a 'network', so
that a more sophisticated renderer can get the shields right.  Note
that 'CR' is NOT enough information for a shield - if you look at
https://kbk.is-a-geek.net/catskills/test4.html?la=41.9474&lo=-74.9127&z=14,
you'll see that Bergen County 3/89 have a style of shield distinct
from Passaic County 677.

Simple examples of concurrencies at
https://kbk.is-a-geek.net/catskills/test4.html?la=44.2134&lo=-73.5966&z=15,
where Court Street is US 9 and NY 9N through the village, or
https://kbk.is-a-geek.net/catskills/test4.html?la=41.9474&lo=-74.9127&z=14
where I-890 is concurrent with NY 7 for a couple of exits.

Obviouisly, arbitrary combinations of network are possible, as at
https://kbk.is-a-geek.net/catskills/test4.html?la=41.9474&lo=-74.9127&z=14
where NY 206 shares its roadway with first Sullivan County 179, then
Sullivan County 91, then Delaware County 7, or
https://kbk.is-a-geek.net/catskills/test4.html?la=41.9474&lo=-74.9127&z=14,
where US 202 is concurrent with US 1A and Maine 9 on Main Street, and
then concurrent with I-395 and Maine 15 on the freeway.

It's best to avoid CR as the network in favour of a string like
US:NY:Delaware. It's a bad assumption to guess that a renderer could
deduce this from the borders of the administrative regions.  Nearly
the whole of NY 120A is in Connecticut
https://kbk.is-a-geek.net/catskills/test4.html?la=41.9474&lo=-74.9127&z=14.

Having the route available also helps sort out the directions in the
signage, as where the eastbound direction of the bridge at
https://kbk.is-a-geek.net/catskills/test4.html?la=41.9474&lo=-74.9127&z=14
is NY 30 North and NY 145 South.

The recommended network for USFS numbered routes is US:NFSR:(name of
the forest):NFH for a National Forest Highway, or US:NFSR:(name of the
forest):NFR for a National Forest Road. If the renderer that I've been
linking to in this message gets one of those (or just USFS for the
network, but the same numbers can be reused many times, so it's better
to have the forest included), it'll produce a shield that looks like
https://kbk.is-a-geek.net/attachments/20190818/nfsr2336.png.

If a road has no name other than its ref, practices differ between
putting in noname=yes, just leaving the name off, and giving it a name
like 'State Highway 9'. I tend to prefer the last of these, since a
renderer that doesn't have any fallback for ways without a name will
still at least render something. I also don't disturb 'ref=*' on the
way when I'm creating a route relation, but when doing rendering of
shaped shields, I ignore 'ref=*' entirely on ways that participate in
route relations.

If possible, (borrowing from another thread), keep the ways in a route
relation sorted. (If you or your editor can't do that, I'll cope, but
it makes matters easier for data consumers.)

These practices are seldom necessary in Europe, where route
concurrencies are rare, and pictorial markers are not important. They
are controversial for the rendering of the main map, because the
requirement is specific to a single locale, and because it is foreseen
to have an adverse impact on server operations when scaled up to
planetary size with minutely updates. I work on the issue of route
rendering off and on, but it's a hobby task so my progress is
agonizingly slow.

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: roads with many names

Warin
In reply to this post by Paul Allen
On 19/08/19 05:16, Paul Allen wrote:
On Sun, 18 Aug 2019 at 19:55, Rob Savoye <[hidden email]> wrote:
  So no space ? USFS roads use "FS " with a space, at least that seems
to be common. So should those be "FS739.1A' ?

My opinion is "paint the label."  Others disagree.  Make up your own mind which
is better.

+1.

The mapper is in charge of what goes into OSM. They should map what they see, not conform to some 'rule' of 'no spaces' etc etc. Map the truth.



_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: roads with many names

Paul Johnson-3
In reply to this post by Rob Savoye


On Sun, Aug 18, 2019 at 10:16 AM Rob Savoye <[hidden email]> wrote:
  Where I live in rural Colorado, many of the roads have 3 names. The
county designated one like "CR 2", but often have an alternate name
everyone uses like "Corkscrew Gulch Road", and then many have a US
Forest Service designation like "FS 729.2B". I usually use the common
name as the 'name' tag, and the USFS designation as the 'alt_name' tag.
I kindof would like to include the county name as well. I do see a lot
of roads use 'name_1', but that gets flagged often by validation. So my
question is, how to I tag all three road names appropriately ?

refs aren't names, they're refs.  ref=CR 2 and ref=FS 729.2B are appropriate.


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
12