Skip to content
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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Is jurisidiction field necessary? #36

Open
e-lo opened this issue Dec 13, 2018 · 1 comment
Open

Is jurisidiction field necessary? #36

e-lo opened this issue Dec 13, 2018 · 1 comment
Assignees
@gregerhardt
Labels
schema Something with the schema itself

Comments

@e-lo
Copy link
Owner

e-lo commented Dec 13, 2018

From tester:

Jurisdiction of the road could have been a good addition. But again, I think we can deduce this using the road name, functional class, county and toll facility. Although, this can be tricky if it is privately owned.
@e-lo
Copy link
Owner Author

e-lo commented Dec 13, 2018

I think it would be useful to have one level of refinement under "state" and jurisdiction is flexible w.r.t. that definition. But I'm not wedded to it (and I think it is optional)

@e-lo e-lo added the schema Something with the schema itself label Jan 4, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees

@gregerhardt gregerhardt

Labels
schema Something with the schema itself
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
2 participants
@e-lo @gregerhardt