On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 4:37 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdre...@gmail.com > wrote:
> Still generally, you can add ref tags for routes, IMHO regardless of them > being signed or not, as long as you can verifiably demonstrate that the > route exists even on those unsigned parts (e.g. official documents that are > publicly accessible). There might also be gaps in a route, it is not a > given that every route will be uninterrupted, so you'd have to find out > whether the route on those unsigned parts "is there" but not signed, or is > interrupted (hence would not be tagged). > If the entire route is unsigned, I use unsigned_ref. One special case would be US 75 Alternate, which I have two relations for, the northern of the two uses unsigned_ref as it's in OklaDOT's inventory as that, but has an END sign at US Historic 66, where it is congruent with 66 until it rejoins main 75 in downtown Tulsa. I believe OklaDOT did this intentionally as the segment of US 75 Alt between OK 97 in Sapulpa and US 75 in Tulsa is signed or will soon (indian time) be signed as OK 33, OK 66, US Historic 66, USBR 66, and an ad-nauseum variety of city and county bike, hike and highway routes that are either congruous or follow it in part for that segment in an effort to combat sign salad. AFAIK, routing software never "relies" on relations, relations are there to > get the possibility to reuse existing geometry without duplicating it, they > provide you with another object, so you can e.g. add several routes on the > same highway, while maintaining a logical structure (one relation object > per route or direction of a route). Whether you'd add the unsigned parts on > the relation depends on the > outcome of your research about the route being interrupted or not (see > above), but you are of course right that you'd either need an additional > relation (part) for the unsigned parts or loose the information that the > route is not signed there. My preference would be to add it to the same > relation and loose the "unsigned" information. > Osmand uses relations near-exclusively for generating route shields (and relations will override). > personally, I don't think "unsigned_ref" is a good tag, as it still refers > to a "ref", so I would put a "ref" tag and if you want another tag that > says the ref is not signed (e.g. ref=PA 235 unsigned_ref=yes, but > admittedly, according to taginfo this is not how it is done), but it might > be discutable and if you'd really want to emphasize that there are no > signs, it would seem a good way to do it. > >
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
