Google translate shows this for the name: Moscow - Maloyaroslavets - Roslavl to the border with the Republic of Belarus (Bobruisk, Slutsk) "- Spas-Demensk - Elnya - Pochinok" - Byvalki - Shirkova
Looks like the destination is included in the name. Surely nobody uses that long tongue-twister in everyday conversation. On Sun, Sep 27, 2015 at 6:37 PM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 27/09/2015 8:21 PM, Peter wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> we've detecting more and more long names for highways, like I once >> reported here: http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/karussell/diary/26055 >> >> One example: >> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/51109811 >> >> As discussed there the names are from official source, but should we >> really include this in the name tag? >> > > Why not put it as the alternate name? This way the 'official name' is > recorded for all to see. > > The name= I'd use would be what the locals call it .. or what is on a sign > post. It won't be long (I'd think). > > >> I've posted this to the OSM forum already and there seem to be a bit >> controversial answers :) >> http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=50717 >> >> But I agree with 'SomeoneElse' that description should not go into the >> name. >> What is common sense here? >> > > Descriptions do not go into the name tag. > But if the 'official name' is that then it goes in. > > If it has no name then there are tags for that too! key:noname=yes > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:noname > > > > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > -- Dave Swarthout Homer, Alaska Chiang Mai, Thailand Travel Blog at http://dswarthout.blogspot.com
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
