Author Topic: Should we change all DF references to CDMX?  (Read 1102 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline neroute2

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 623
  • Last Login:Today at 12:20:31 am
Re: Should we change all DF references to CDMX?
« Reply #15 on: November 17, 2019, 04:00:28 pm »
Are you aware of any other countries that prominently use abbreviations on their subnational routes?
Spain for their autonomous community routes (as michih should know!)
That's pretty horrible. In what universe is this CB-170?

Edit: I see, the route name is still CA170. Changing still seems like additional confusion with no benefit. Someone traveling these roads is likely not going to know the ISO abbreviation, unless they've looked it up.
« Last Edit: November 17, 2019, 04:04:39 pm by neroute2 »

Offline si404

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1311
  • Last Login:Today at 08:32:45 am
Re: Should we change all DF references to CDMX?
« Reply #16 on: November 17, 2019, 04:20:36 pm »
Changing still seems like additional confusion with no benefit.
Likewise with the DF -> CDMX change, surely?

My point is that we don't necessarily match subdivision abbrevations with subdivision-derived prefixes.

Offline neroute2

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 623
  • Last Login:Today at 12:20:31 am
Re: Should we change all DF references to CDMX?
« Reply #17 on: November 17, 2019, 04:56:53 pm »
Changing still seems like additional confusion with no benefit.
Likewise with the DF -> CDMX change, surely?
That's an actual change of name of the subdivision. There no longer is a DF.