Give Reference field more specific labels

[1ec5]

The Reference field, which is backed by the ref tag and appears in numerous presets, tends to be misinterpreted as a place to indicate a source, similar to the purpose of a “Reference” section in a Wikipedia article. As far as I can tell, none of the use cases for ref is actually called “a reference” per se in English.

iD should head off this confusion and promote appropriate usage of ref by naming the field more appropriately based on the preset. For example:

• On Road Route, Bus Route, Bicycle Route, etc., call it “Route Number”.
• On Motorway, Trunk Road, Primary Link, etc., call it “Road Number” – or “Route Number” also?
• On Motorway Junction, call it “Junction Number” or “Exit Number”.
• On Airport and Airfield, call it “Airport Code”.
• On Stop Position, call it “Stop Number”.
• On Platform, call it “Platform Number”.

For any miscellaneous uses, “Reference Code” would be a good alternative to “Reference”.

There’s already a variant of the Reference field with a placeholder reading “Hole number”; I think it would be better to label the field itself “Hole Number”.

[bhousel]

Sounds good to me..

[magol]

@1ec5 The Key:reffor airport should not be used according to Tag:aeroway=aerodrome. Instead of renaming it, it should be hidden so that you do not use it by mistake.

[bhousel]

Thanks for pointing that out @magol - I didn't realize ref on airports was deprecated.. I agree we should remove the field, since we have iata and icao already.