Re: [talk-au] Edits in and around Mt Barker, SA
- Original Message > From: Kim Hawtin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: Talk-au@openstreetmap.org > Sent: Tuesday, 21 October, 2008 5:49:42 PM > Subject: Re: [talk-au] Edits in and around Mt Barker, SA > > hi guys =) > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >> Kim wrote: > >> I've been busy uploading traces and mapping around Mt Barker > >> and Littlehampton a bit lately. I have a couple of questions > >> I was hoping folks could clear up; > >> > >> - Are the rail and road under passes right? I have set them as > >> tunnels, because it makes more sense than the freeway being a > >> bridge, how ever what do other folks use? > > > > Use a tunnel if it is one, or a bridge if that is what is there. I'm sure > > there are some weird hybrid examples, but if it is a culvit for > > streams/drains, > > I use a tunnel. If I'm not sure what is there, I leave it with the ways > > overlapping without any bridge/tunnel tags (I think the validator in JOSM > > warns > > about it), so I or someone else can fix it when visiting it next. > > ok, its not a bridge, but a built up embankment with a tunnel in it. > there are a couple of bridges further east, but wasn't sure if there > was a standard or my miss-interpretation I have an example of an embankment situation. See http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=-37.72361&lon=144.86789&zoom=17 The freight rail line is on an embankment over Steele Creek, which goes through a "tunnel" (culvert) under the embankment. The Western Ring Road motorway just to the NW is instead two bridges over the creek. I could swear it used to show up on one of the renderer layers, but not now. Might be because of all the Mapnik style changes they have been working on. BlueMM Search 1000's of available singles in your area at the new Yahoo!7 Dating. Get Started http://au.dating.yahoo.com/?cid=53151&pid=1011 ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Edits in and around Mt Barker, SA
On Wed, 22 Oct 2008, Darrin Smith wrote: > so I have some > hope that sometime in the future the route system will be pretty > consistent. there are drugs for people like you with delusions :-) ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Edits in and around Mt Barker, SA
Darrin Smith wrote: > On Wed, 22 Oct 2008 09:40:49 +1030 > Kim Hawtin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Darrin Smith wrote: >>> On Mon, 20 Oct 2008 21:22:20 -0700 (PDT) >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Looking at your B37 & Alexandrina & Flaxley Rd roundabout, you don't need oneway=yes(it's implied), clockwise(just draw it in a clockwise direction), ref(roundabout's don't inherit route numbers, it's for when roundabout's have specific ref numbers [in Europe I think]). >>> Can you explain why that roundabout wouldn't have a B37, given it's >>> actually part of the B37 route? If you leave out the B37 then you're >>> leaving a gap in the B37 ref's, surely that is inconsistent? >> i didn't put this roundabout in, so when i see stuff like that its >> hard to know what is the right thing to do unless we put it to the >> list. > > It's been there for a while, my question was more directed at > [EMAIL PROTECTED] in this case, I personally think the B37 > should be there as it is (I'm probably the one who added that tag, > can't be bothered confirming it right now ;) since you have to travel > through it as part of travelling along the B37. Its something i need to do to take more notes. Having a passenger in the car help lots here =) Or I'll have to take the dog on much longer walks ;) >> and i'm yet to find a decent resource for what roads are named routes. >> i suppose i need to make notes from the big green signs huh ? =) > > That's how I've generally been finding them, having a little interest > in highway routing I've been looking around for resources and the BGS's > are the most reliable source I can find, even the old copyrighted > sources are a bit lacking in accuracy. Unfortunately there are still > a number of areas where even the BGS's are lacking although I have to > give TransportSA credit, travelling around SA this year I've found a > number of places where brand new signs with routes have been ereceted > in the last couple of years (since I was last there) so I have some > hope that sometime in the future the route system will be pretty > consistent. =) * Lots of the area's don't need area=yes, like parking/schools/landuse etc. >>> Is this yet another crazy OSM inconsistency? Surely any of those >>> closed loops are implicitly areas? In fact I notice mappaint in >>> josm tends to render closed versions of these as areas without any >>> redundant area=yes tag, so I'm not alone in my thinking here. >> I've seen areas around adelaide where they specifically have. >> it looks a whole lot better to see areas like commercial and schools >> marked in, its easier to see and the labels are marked up better. >> i don't understand how the renderer works, but putting in the area >> attribute helps for the mapper to identify what the thing is for. >> well it helps me get a better idea about what im editing anyway. =) > ] > > Oh man! > I feel like a wally :) > I just re-read what bluemm was saying there and he's totally saying the > same thing as me anyway! > Can we just pretend I didn't write my original paragraph? :) Don't worry about it, these things happen =) cheers, Kim -- Operating Systems, Services and Operations Information Technology Services, The University of Adelaide [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Edits in and around Mt Barker, SA
On Wed, 22 Oct 2008 09:40:49 +1030 Kim Hawtin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Darrin Smith wrote: > > On Mon, 20 Oct 2008 21:22:20 -0700 (PDT) > > > >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > >> Looking at your B37 & Alexandrina & Flaxley Rd roundabout, you > >> don't need oneway=yes(it's implied), clockwise(just draw it in a > >> clockwise direction), ref(roundabout's don't inherit route > >> numbers, it's for when roundabout's have specific ref numbers [in > >> Europe I think]). > > > > Can you explain why that roundabout wouldn't have a B37, given it's > > actually part of the B37 route? If you leave out the B37 then you're > > leaving a gap in the B37 ref's, surely that is inconsistent? > > i didn't put this roundabout in, so when i see stuff like that its > hard to know what is the right thing to do unless we put it to the > list. It's been there for a while, my question was more directed at [EMAIL PROTECTED] in this case, I personally think the B37 should be there as it is (I'm probably the one who added that tag, can't be bothered confirming it right now ;) since you have to travel through it as part of travelling along the B37. > and i'm yet to find a decent resource for what roads are named routes. > i suppose i need to make notes from the big green signs huh ? =) That's how I've generally been finding them, having a little interest in highway routing I've been looking around for resources and the BGS's are the most reliable source I can find, even the old copyrighted sources are a bit lacking in accuracy. Unfortunately there are still a number of areas where even the BGS's are lacking although I have to give TransportSA credit, travelling around SA this year I've found a number of places where brand new signs with routes have been ereceted in the last couple of years (since I was last there) so I have some hope that sometime in the future the route system will be pretty consistent. > >> * Lots of the area's don't need area=yes, like > >> parking/schools/landuse etc. > > > > Is this yet another crazy OSM inconsistency? Surely any of those > > closed loops are implicitly areas? In fact I notice mappaint in > > josm tends to render closed versions of these as areas without any > > redundant area=yes tag, so I'm not alone in my thinking here. > > I've seen areas around adelaide where they specifically have. > it looks a whole lot better to see areas like commercial and schools > marked in, its easier to see and the labels are marked up better. > i don't understand how the renderer works, but putting in the area > attribute helps for the mapper to identify what the thing is for. > well it helps me get a better idea about what im editing anyway. =) ] Oh man! I feel like a wally :) I just re-read what bluemm was saying there and he's totally saying the same thing as me anyway! Can we just pretend I didn't write my original paragraph? :) -- Darrin Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Edits in and around Mt Barker, SA
Darrin Smith wrote: > On Mon, 20 Oct 2008 21:22:20 -0700 (PDT) > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >> Looking at your B37 & Alexandrina & Flaxley Rd roundabout, you don't >> need oneway=yes(it's implied), clockwise(just draw it in a clockwise >> direction), ref(roundabout's don't inherit route numbers, it's for >> when roundabout's have specific ref numbers [in Europe I think]). > > Can you explain why that roundabout wouldn't have a B37, given it's > actually part of the B37 route? If you leave out the B37 then you're > leaving a gap in the B37 ref's, surely that is inconsistent? i didn't put this roundabout in, so when i see stuff like that its hard to know what is the right thing to do unless we put it to the list. my focus at the moment is to get gps trails into roads, connect them up approximately how they look on the ground and get all the attributes i know about tagged. then after that get some guidance about what stuff we're missing... thats the beauty about peer review right? =) and i'm yet to find a decent resource for what roads are named routes. i suppose i need to make notes from the big green signs huh ? =) >> They are "relations" to tie different ways together to form >> logically-connected ways, eg. routes. They are relatively new to OSM >> and I haven't played with them much, but others have added them in my >> area. The only strange thing I can see is that the motorway_link for >> the B37 & M1 are added to the relations, which I believe is wrong >> because they are on/offramps, not the actual freeway that the route >> follows. > > Are you sure you're talking about the right relation? Since I created > the M1 in relation in the last few days, and just checked it I can see > I messed up and actually added a point by mistake (now fixed) but the > ramps are part of the Princes Highway and South-East Freeway street > relations (since they are parts of those 'streets'). > >> * Lots of the area's don't need area=yes, like >> parking/schools/landuse etc. > > Is this yet another crazy OSM inconsistency? Surely any of those closed > loops are implicitly areas? In fact I notice mappaint in josm tends to > render closed versions of these as areas without any redundant area=yes > tag, so I'm not alone in my thinking here. I've seen areas around adelaide where they specifically have. it looks a whole lot better to see areas like commercial and schools marked in, its easier to see and the labels are marked up better. i don't understand how the renderer works, but putting in the area attribute helps for the mapper to identify what the thing is for. well it helps me get a better idea about what im editing anyway. =) >> * I think the highway=traffic_signals on B37 next to Cornerstone >> College should include crossing=traffic_signals (or just >> crossing=pelican), as it appears to be a pedestrian crossing, see >> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Key:crossing. it is a set of lights for a pedestrian crossing for the school. i'll mark it up on the weekend =) > Perhaps a twig to the map features page with respect to this is need, I > find the reading of it very unclear and had been assuming from how it's > written that highway=traffic_signals is used for all traffic signals > (since they all controll traffic)... Thanks for you feedback =) regards, Kim -- Operating Systems, Services and Operations Information Technology Services, The University of Adelaide [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Edits in and around Mt Barker, SA
Liz wrote: > On Tue, 21 Oct 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> . A normal suburban roundabout should just be a circle (I use 8 corners) >> with the 4 ways connected. Merkaartor has a roundabout tool where you click >> a crossing, select the diameter of the roundabout and it creates a circle >> with the ways cropped off to it (JOSM might have something similar). Some >> people mapping Melbourne use mini-roundabout's to save time, but it's only >> for mini UK style ones with a tiny white painted circle in the middle of >> the intersection. > > We did decide on this list that for us, in Au, we'd stick with Brent's > definition, that if the roundabout fitted within the width of the road, it > would be a mini-roundabout. > I can't imagine any Austrylyan driver paying any attention to a painted > circle > on the road pretending to be a roundabout - they only see concrete barriers. well, the handful of roundabouts im thinking about are 12-20 meters across. so that would be a draw in a way for the roundabout by hand and link in the connecting ways then ... right? there are a couple of little roundabouts in the burbs, but they are about 3 meters across + 2 times the single lane width. so i should mark them up as mini roundabouts ... right? regards, Kim -- Operating Systems, Services and Operations Information Technology Services, The University of Adelaide [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Edits in and around Mt Barker, SA
On Mon, 20 Oct 2008 21:22:20 -0700 (PDT) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Looking at your B37 & Alexandrina & Flaxley Rd roundabout, you don't > need oneway=yes(it's implied), clockwise(just draw it in a clockwise > direction), ref(roundabout's don't inherit route numbers, it's for > when roundabout's have specific ref numbers [in Europe I think]). Can you explain why that roundabout wouldn't have a B37, given it's actually part of the B37 route? If you leave out the B37 then you're leaving a gap in the B37 ref's, surely that is inconsistent? > They are "relations" to tie different ways together to form > logically-connected ways, eg. routes. They are relatively new to OSM > and I haven't played with them much, but others have added them in my > area. The only strange thing I can see is that the motorway_link for > the B37 & M1 are added to the relations, which I believe is wrong > because they are on/offramps, not the actual freeway that the route > follows. Are you sure you're talking about the right relation? Since I created the M1 in relation in the last few days, and just checked it I can see I messed up and actually added a point by mistake (now fixed) but the ramps are part of the Princes Highway and South-East Freeway street relations (since they are parts of those 'streets'). > * Lots of the area's don't need area=yes, like > parking/schools/landuse etc. Is this yet another crazy OSM inconsistency? Surely any of those closed loops are implicitly areas? In fact I notice mappaint in josm tends to render closed versions of these as areas without any redundant area=yes tag, so I'm not alone in my thinking here. > * I think the highway=traffic_signals on B37 next to Cornerstone > College should include crossing=traffic_signals (or just > crossing=pelican), as it appears to be a pedestrian crossing, see > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Key:crossing. Perhaps a twig to the map features page with respect to this is need, I find the reading of it very unclear and had been assuming from how it's written that highway=traffic_signals is used for all traffic signals (since they all controll traffic)... -- =b ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Edits in and around Mt Barker, SA
Hi. On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 11:33 AM, Kim Hawtin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > - My edits seem to be taking around two weeks to hit the OSM > normal map ... isn't this normally happening weekly? > > You can force an update to the Osmarender layer so you can see if your edits are OK. Updates generally take around an hour, although they can take less for non-complex areas, and they can take more if the render queue is full. Find the area you edited on http://informationfreeway.org/ and zoom in to zoom level 12. (Zoom level shows in the bottom right.) At zoom level 12, as you move your mouse over the map it draws a dotted red line around the squares. Ctrl-click the square with your edits in it and it pops up a dialog telling you that it will submit a render request. Click OK to add that square to the render queue. - Ben. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Edits in and around Mt Barker, SA
On Tue, 21 Oct 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > . A normal suburban roundabout should just be a circle (I use 8 corners) > with the 4 ways connected. Merkaartor has a roundabout tool where you click > a crossing, select the diameter of the roundabout and it creates a circle > with the ways cropped off to it (JOSM might have something similar). Some > people mapping Melbourne use mini-roundabout's to save time, but it's only > for mini UK style ones with a tiny white painted circle in the middle of > the intersection. We did decide on this list that for us, in Au, we'd stick with Brent's definition, that if the roundabout fitted within the width of the road, it would be a mini-roundabout. I can't imagine any Austrylyan driver paying any attention to a painted circle on the road pretending to be a roundabout - they only see concrete barriers. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Edits in and around Mt Barker, SA
hi guys =) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> Kim wrote: >> I've been busy uploading traces and mapping around Mt Barker >> and Littlehampton a bit lately. I have a couple of questions >> I was hoping folks could clear up; >> >> - Are the rail and road under passes right? I have set them as >> tunnels, because it makes more sense than the freeway being a >> bridge, how ever what do other folks use? > > Use a tunnel if it is one, or a bridge if that is what is there. I'm sure > there are some weird hybrid examples, but if it is a culvit for > streams/drains, I use a tunnel. If I'm not sure what is there, I leave it > with the ways overlapping without any bridge/tunnel tags (I think the > validator in JOSM warns about it), so I or someone else can fix it when > visiting it next. ok, its not a bridge, but a built up embankment with a tunnel in it. there are a couple of bridges further east, but wasn't sure if there was a standard or my miss-interpretation >> - I've put in a few round'a'bouts ... they are messy critters. >> is it the right thing to draw them out with little link roads >> or should they be put up as where the roads intersect with >> the joining node and tag that node as a round about? >> especially larger ones, like the end of Gawler street near the >> bus interchange? > > Bane of my existence!! The OSM wiki says you should only draw the connecting > ways as split (which form triangle islands) if it is a large roundabout. A > normal suburban roundabout should just be a circle (I use 8 corners) with the > 4 ways connected. Merkaartor has a roundabout tool where you click a > crossing, select the diameter of the roundabout and it creates a circle with > the ways cropped off to it (JOSM might have something similar). Some people > mapping Melbourne use mini-roundabout's to save time, but it's only for mini > UK style ones with a tiny white painted circle in the middle of the > intersection. I'd personally like the junction=roundabout tag to apply to a > node, with a eg. junction:width=5m tag, so renderers could draw the circle > road & inner island all by themselves without lots of extra effort. > > Looking at your B37 & Alexandrina & Flaxley Rd roundabout, you don't need > oneway=yes(it's implied), clockwise(just draw it in a clockwise direction), > ref(roundabout's don't inherit route numbers, it's for when roundabout's have > specific ref numbers [in Europe I think]). The incoming split lanes for B37 > should be primary (as it's still the road, not a link, just split into > oneway's), as the north ones are, but the south ones are primary_link. > Conversely, the East & West split's should be secondary. Split's should have > the same tags as the road it splits from, but split's add oneway=yes. Only > *_link's and roundabout's don't have ref's or names (except when specifically > signposted, UK has examples of this). > The Alexandrina Rd & Fletcher St one is missing the junction=roundabout > circle for the roundabout, and missing oneway=yes tags for the split ways. part of the problem is I am one of several mappers in the area and I'm trying to find out which is a good/right/better/consistent way to do it. so the Alexandrina & Flaxley Rd roundabout was put in by someone else after I put the initial roads in. >> - I have been seeing lots of roads and other objects get a blue >> halo ... there seems to be an attribute against each of these >> that I didn't mark up, but by my reading, isn't supported by >> the renderer? especially "ref" and "street" ... > > They are "relations" to tie different ways together to form > logically-connected ways, eg. routes. They are relatively new to OSM and I > haven't played with them much, but others have added them in my area. The > only strange thing I can see is that the motorway_link for the B37 & M1 are > added to the relations, which I believe is wrong because they are > on/offramps, not the actual freeway that the route follows. well i'm seeing the halos appear on areas, creeks, isolated bits of road, and railway that are not connected to other things. i assumed this was a way in potlatch to flag busted key value pairs. >> - My edits seem to be taking around two weeks to hit the OSM >> normal map ... isn't this normally happening weekly? > > The main map grabs data on Wednesdays UK time, and then spends a day or two > creating new tiles for the map, therefore if you updated OSM on Wednesday our > time, it could be a week & a bit before the updates appear. And if you > browser (or ISP) has the map tiles cached, you might need to Ctrl+F5 to force > a reload from the tile server. Miss match of old & new tiles usually means a > caching issue. ok, this is cool, its been a bit variable. also have had to go back and make some edits on ways to make them right, like oneway sections etc... > Tags suggestions > > Looking at Mt Barker township, you've done a fantastic job. =D every little
Re: [talk-au] Edits in and around Mt Barker, SA
Hi Kim, - Original Message > From: Kim Hawtin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: Talk-au@openstreetmap.org > Sent: Tuesday, 21 October, 2008 11:33:25 AM > Subject: [talk-au] Edits in and around Mt Barker, SA > > Mornen all, > > I've been busy uploading traces and mapping around Mt Barker > and Littlehampton a bit lately. I have a couple of questions > I was hoping folks could clear up; > > - Are the rail and road under passes right? I have set them as > tunnels, because it makes more sense than the freeway being a > bridge, how ever what do other folks use? Use a tunnel if it is one, or a bridge if that is what is there. I'm sure there are some weird hybrid examples, but if it is a culvit for streams/drains, I use a tunnel. If I'm not sure what is there, I leave it with the ways overlapping without any bridge/tunnel tags (I think the validator in JOSM warns about it), so I or someone else can fix it when visiting it next. > - I've put in a few round'a'bouts ... they are messy critters. > is it the right thing to draw them out with little link roads > or should they be put up as where the roads intersect with > the joining node and tag that node as a round about? > especially larger ones, like the end of Gawler street near the > bus interchange? Bane of my existence!! The OSM wiki says you should only draw the connecting ways as split (which form triangle islands) if it is a large roundabout. A normal suburban roundabout should just be a circle (I use 8 corners) with the 4 ways connected. Merkaartor has a roundabout tool where you click a crossing, select the diameter of the roundabout and it creates a circle with the ways cropped off to it (JOSM might have something similar). Some people mapping Melbourne use mini-roundabout's to save time, but it's only for mini UK style ones with a tiny white painted circle in the middle of the intersection. I'd personally like the junction=roundabout tag to apply to a node, with a eg. junction:width=5m tag, so renderers could draw the circle road & inner island all by themselves without lots of extra effort. Looking at your B37 & Alexandrina & Flaxley Rd roundabout, you don't need oneway=yes(it's implied), clockwise(just draw it in a clockwise direction), ref(roundabout's don't inherit route numbers, it's for when roundabout's have specific ref numbers [in Europe I think]). The incoming split lanes for B37 should be primary (as it's still the road, not a link, just split into oneway's), as the north ones are, but the south ones are primary_link. Conversely, the East & West split's should be secondary. Split's should have the same tags as the road it splits from, but split's add oneway=yes. Only *_link's and roundabout's don't have ref's or names (except when specifically signposted, UK has examples of this). The Alexandrina Rd & Fletcher St one is missing the junction=roundabout circle for the roundabout, and missing oneway=yes tags for the split ways. > - I have been seeing lots of roads and other objects get a blue > halo ... there seems to be an attribute against each of these > that I didn't mark up, but by my reading, isn't supported by > the renderer? especially "ref" and "street" ... They are "relations" to tie different ways together to form logically-connected ways, eg. routes. They are relatively new to OSM and I haven't played with them much, but others have added them in my area. The only strange thing I can see is that the motorway_link for the B37 & M1 are added to the relations, which I believe is wrong because they are on/offramps, not the actual freeway that the route follows. > - My edits seem to be taking around two weeks to hit the OSM > normal map ... isn't this normally happening weekly? The main map grabs data on Wednesdays UK time, and then spends a day or two creating new tiles for the map, therefore if you updated OSM on Wednesday our time, it could be a week & a bit before the updates appear. And if you browser (or ISP) has the map tiles cached, you might need to Ctrl+F5 to force a reload from the tile server. Miss match of old & new tiles usually means a caching issue. > cheers, > > Kim Tags suggestions Looking at Mt Barker township, you've done a fantastic job. I noticed a few tagging schemes different to mine:- * Lots of the area's don't need area=yes, like parking/schools/landuse etc. * Parking/school doesn't need a separate POI node in the middle, the renderers are now smart enough to stick an icon in the middle. * Landuse doesn't need to be bounded by streets (cookie cutter'ed), just draw around the outside of the area (la
Re: [talk-au] Edits in and around Mt Barker, SA
2008/10/21 Kim Hawtin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > - Are the rail and road under passes right? I have set them as > tunnels, because it makes more sense than the freeway being a > bridge, how ever what do other folks use? Without actually looking at what you've done - I've done both. If the underpass really does feel like a tunnel, then I've used that, even if it is actually at the surrounding ground level, and the highway's on an embankment. There are some cases where a bridge for the highway is a better description, though. Also - if you have roads crossing at only a small angle, a bridge shows up better on most renderers than a tunnel does. We're not supposed to "map for the renderer", but if it could go either way anyway, you might want to keep this in mind. > - I've put in a few round'a'bouts ... they are messy critters. > is it the right thing to draw them out with little link roads > or should they be put up as where the roads intersect with > the joining node and tag that node as a round about? > especially larger ones, like the end of Gawler street near the > bus interchange? We discussed this on this list a while back - and decided that we don't actually have many (any?) of the paint only roundabouts in Australia that are quite common in the UK and are tagged as mini_roundabouts. So we would use that tag for any roundabout where the central island fits inside the road intersection. This would cover most suburban roundabouts. Just connect the roads at a central node, tag the node mini_roundabout. Don't forget to add the direction=clockwise tag. Any bigger roundabout you actually draw a circle (at least four points), mark it as junction=roundabout, and make sure the way goes clockwise, because it will be oneway. Then connect the roads to the roundabout. The following link has pictures. And you're right, they are painful and messy. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Tag:junction%3Droundabout > - My edits seem to be taking around two weeks to hit the OSM > normal map ... isn't this normally happening weekly? They get new data for the renderer weekly, but then they actually have to process the data to form maps, which takes a while. This also explains why sometimes you see a mix of old and new data where one tile has been rendered, but the one beside hasn't been updated yet. Stephen ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] Edits in and around Mt Barker, SA
Mornen all, I've been busy uploading traces and mapping around Mt Barker and Littlehampton a bit lately. I have a couple of questions I was hoping folks could clear up; - Are the rail and road under passes right? I have set them as tunnels, because it makes more sense than the freeway being a bridge, how ever what do other folks use? - I've put in a few round'a'bouts ... they are messy critters. is it the right thing to draw them out with little link roads or should they be put up as where the roads intersect with the joining node and tag that node as a round about? especially larger ones, like the end of Gawler street near the bus interchange? - I have been seeing lots of roads and other objects get a blue halo ... there seems to be an attribute against each of these that I didn't mark up, but by my reading, isn't supported by the renderer? especially "ref" and "street" ... - My edits seem to be taking around two weeks to hit the OSM normal map ... isn't this normally happening weekly? cheers, Kim -- VK5FNET ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
