© 2004
Canonical Ltd.
•
Terms of use
•
Data privacy
•
Contact Launchpad Support
•
Blog
•
Careers
•
System status
•
1b1ed1a
(Get the code!)
That seems to be what Trumbull County is doing. [1] I’ve been putting the township names in the `modifier` key, but perhaps `is_in:township` would be better. Either way, I think it’s reasonable to simply these shields as much as possible and not worry about reproducing the shields exactly. After all, there’s no way to make “South Bloomfield” legible (except at z=19). And it’d be much easier to standardize on one green shield and one white shield rather than worry about minor font and layout differences.
For Auglaize County, I’ll make sure to put the hyphen in. In making the shields for Shelby and Wayne, I had to manually position a separate text box with a smaller font for the dash. The hyphen in those counties seems like an afterthought, and I’d just leave it out.
Fremont’s ranges are complete. (They’re just old alignments of state and U.S. routes.) I’ll put an ellipsis in if I have an incomplete set of ranges. I’m still having a hard time figuring out ranges for the southeastern counties, but I’ll have ranges for the northwestern ones shortly. A caveat about the northwestern counties is that, although their routes are laid out along a neat grid, there are some fractional exceptions like 22.75. [2]
I haven’t seen many examples of Ashland County township routes, but it *seems* like many counties have one set of township route numbers. The only reason to distinguish them as separate networks is that township routes may be signed by one township but not the next, or they’ll have different styles (green vs. white, or “Township” vs. “Twp.”). For Ashland County, I’ll put the routes under :TWP unless I notice any overlap.
[1] http://
[2] http://