On 16.12.2020 14:19, Skyler Hawthorne wrote:
On Wed, Dec 16, 2020, at 05:44, Tom Pfeifer wrote:
What is written on the sign at this junction? If "North" is mentioned there I
would be
happy enough with the tagging above.
That is correct, the sign says "I 787 North". However the wiki page for the
destination:ref key states:
The key destination:ref
<https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:destination:ref>=* should be
used to specify the reference of the roads directly ahead as indicated on
signposts, road
markings or similar. The value of this key should be equal to the value of
the key ref
<https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:ref>=* of these roads.
Note the last sentence. If the destination:ref must be the same as the ref it is going to, then this
would be I 787, or else all the ways along the entire I 787 route should have their ref tags changed
to indicate direction as well.
Well, it says 'should', not 'must', thus in this case using destination:ref="I 787 North" is a
refinement of just "I 787". Maybe an improvement for the phrase in the wiki would be
"should be equal to or a further qualification of related to the value...".
On 16.12.2020 15:41, Paul Johnson wrote:
> Wouldn't it make more sense, and isn't it already more common, for
destination tags to contain the
> information on the destination signs, which /do/ differentiate direction?
Haven't analysed that, but if the destinations are signposted that way, it
should be reflected in
the tagging.
> I feel like this is another example of "the wiki was written by someone with
inadequate information."
Both tagging and wiki develop, hopefully forward. In this case,
Key:destination:ref redirects
onto an old 2012 proposal, I'm probably going to resolve that soon with
describing the current practice.
tom
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
