On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 4:34 AM, Dave F. <[email protected]> wrote:
> Your example in Canada isn't even a turning circle. I'd map it as a looping > way, because i like to do things accurately. Well, the one I showed was more of a triangle. If you look around the area though, you'll see that most cul-de-sac style roads have a facility where a real vehicle would have a chance of turning around. Some like this one on Cardinal Place are simply a bulbuous lump at the end of the road: http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Sherwood+Park,+Division+No.+11,+Alberta,+Canada&ll=53.521431,-113.292432&spn=0,0.038581&z=15&layer=c&cbll=53.521432,-113.292628&panoid=TIWHdCp6zNDU1J_1TOtUPw&cbp=12,87.43,,0,18.21 While others are much more like a circular way: http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Sherwood+Park,+Division+No.+11,+Alberta,+Canada&layer=c&cbll=53.521347,-113.282388&panoid=0RHiGAj-QCXD0cAUB9276w&cbp=12,14.12,,0,2.1&ll=53.521501,-113.28239&spn=0,0.009645&z=17 So really trying to generalize that all cul-de-sac type roads have a "turning circle" at the end is a fallacy. Especially when you use the crazy British concept of a turning circle being some miniature parking lot at the end of a narrow little lane where one might have the chance of turning a bicycle around without having to dismount. We're mapping the world where there are huge numbers of variations abound, but we're trying to pigeon hole all of that into the British, or European definitions. There are going to be issues. James VE6SRV _______________________________________________ newbies mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/newbies
