On 12/07/2020 22:50, Mike Thompson wrote: > > > On Sun, Jul 12, 2020 at 10:49 AM Robert Skedgell <r...@hubris.org.uk > <mailto:r...@hubris.org.uk>> wrote: > >> >> The very short NCN route 425 in south-east London is network=ncn because >> it's a Sustrans route. THe scope of the route is very local, but the >> scope of the network is national. Without the network tag, how would a >> renderer or router determine whether it was an ncn, rcn or lcn? All >> three exist in Greater London. > I am not saying get rid of the network tag, I am saying we should be > consistent. In the above case, if network=UK (instead of network=ncn), > one would know it is national. First because the UK is a nation and > there is no smaller jurisdiction that follows "UK" in the tag, and > because there would be cycle routes all over the UK where network=UK. > > Using this method, which seems to be in use for road routes, would allow > us to indicate the specific network which a route is part of, instead of > just the "scope" of the network. So in the US, for a hiking route I > could say network=US:FS and everyone would know that it is a national > network operated by the US Forest Service. One might say that is what > the "operator" tag is for, but some agencies or jurisdictions operate > multiple networks, and this would be reflected in the network tag. >
Perhaps prefixing with the country code might work, but you would still have to convince authors of rendering and routing services that a change from network=ncn to network=GB:NCN is worth implementing. Starting with UK presents another problem for consistency, as it's not an ISO 3166-1-alpha-2 country code, just the abbreviated name of the country. _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
