Hi NicaTopo,

I am sad to see that my attempts to persuade you to not go on with the removal of the alpha portions of the alpha-numeric ref numbers on the Nicaraguan highways have all been in vain and simply ignored by you. 

The fact that these alpha-numeric road `ref` numbers are visibly present on the actual highway markers remains to be a true fact in Nicaragua.

Whatever other scenario which occurs in Costa Rica, Panama or Columbia should have no incidence on how these should be mapped in Nicaragua. They are all different countries, each with different rules and ways of doing things.

It is also true that in Nicaragua there are currently main roads with the `NIC` prefix, and other "not as important" roads which use the `NN` prefix which share the same identical number portion of the `ref`. For example `[NIC-5](https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/14635933/history)` and `[NN-5](https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/17062619)` - both already edited by you - exist as such, the first one being a main route (secondary) while the latter is now a (tertiary). Just as in this example, there are 32 different roads which share the same number with the two stated prefixes (a grand total of "now conflicting" 64 roads). Having numbered only roads will obviously create chaos within the Nicaraguan highway grid and is a misinterpretation of the reason behind the existence of the prefixes to begin with. I do understand your point of view, which could make sense under other circumstances, but cannot agree with it in this particular case - hence my insistence on the topic. 

And the fact that the local community does not currently agree with your editing these, should also carry some weight for your decision, as you no longer live there as far as I understand. Again I ask you to reconsider your editing these `ref` alpha-numeric identifications, please.

Thank you and best regards,
JAAS - Jorge Aguirre