Re: [Talk-GB] Relation: Street

I understood the general rule of thumb was to map to the data and not to the renderer (which is an unknown quantity). If you're concerned about, say, OSM Standard layer, then I'm sure some kind of look-ahead could be employed when preparing a street for rendering: "If a way shares a start or end

Re: [Talk-GB] Relation: Street

On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 9:55 PM, Simon Poole wrote: > Brian was referring to "street" relations, not "associatedStreet" which > is something very different. So I failed to make my point. I was hoping to explain that while there is some support for associatedStreets and there is

Re: [Talk-GB] Relation: Street

Brian was referring to "street" relations, not "associatedStreet" which is something very different. In any case, I believe the support for street relations approaches roughly zero, and that really the repeated street names is something the renderer needs to fix (and it can be done). Simon Am

Re: [Talk-GB] Relation: Street

An associatedStreet has no impact at all on the renderer. Nominated uses it to a certain degree to match houses with streets (in case the addr:street does not match the name of a street in the proximity). There are some tools from the French community that uses this relation as well. The French

[Talk-GB] Relation: Street

Hi everyone Road ways are becoming increasingly chopped up into smaller pieces as more data is added ( speedlimits, bus routes, cycle routes, lane counts, lane types and lane turns; restrictions etc.) and the name becomes similarly repeated. I'm hesitant to use the relation street and shift