-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 576
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Unsigned routes should not be included in the transportation_name layer #1613
Comments
This is based (IMO) on the erroneous tagging of unsigned routes as "unsigned=yes". They should be tagged with "unsigned_ref". Tagging as "unsigned" in the given example would imply that there is not only no signage for the highway designation, but no signage for the "street name" (which presumably is not the case). It would seem better to simply fix the erroneous tagging. |
I am talking about the tagging of the relation, not the tagging of the way. Tagging |
Apparently I misunderstood the example you gave... after "driving" it on street view, I now get that there are actually no signs for the route whatsoever... it's not a "virtual congruency" but a "virtual highway". The "highway" signs along it are all directional ("to" whatever). It still seems relevant, though, that the physical feature that is actually being mapped (the road) does itself have signs, they just don't show the highway designation... I think that's the specific point that unsigned_ref is meant to capture. TBH using "unsigned=yes" on a relation that has members that do have signs (even if they say something else) seems a bit too abstract, when you can use "unsigned_ref" to point at the specific trait that isn't marked. |
The
transportation_name
layer is intended for labelling highways. However, routes are currently included in this layer even if they are explicitly tagged withunsigned=yes
.For example, I 375 Business Spur (Detroit, MI) is currently rendered by OpenMapTiles:
For the vast majority of non-expert use-cases, maps will be better if they do not show unsigned routes. I therefore suggest to exclude routes with
unsigned=yes
from thetransportation_name
layer.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: