Re: [OSM-talk-nl] junction= roundabaout
Am 22.11.2012 07:50, schrieb Maarten Deen: On 2012-11-21 20:48, Wolfgang Wienke wrote: Am 21.11.2012 18:48, schrieb Maarten Deen: On 11/21/2012 06:45 PM, Maarten Deen wrote: On 11/21/2012 06:41 PM, Wolfgang Wienke wrote: Hi, I'm mapping in NL near Aachen. Can someone tell me, why there is more that ONE way in a dutch roundabaout? There isn't. A roundabout is always one way. If there are two directions it is not a roundabout but a circular road. Just after sending this I realized that I must have misread your question. You mean why most roundabouts are made up of more than one way. Initially it is because of the AND import. The AND dataset was such that between every junction of 3 or more roads there was a sperate way. What means the AND dataset? AND donated their dataset in 2007 and was subsequently integraded into OSM. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/AND_Data I do not find there any special about roundabouts. I think, that it is important to recognize a roundabout for navys to tell the user something like leave the rounabout at the second street. Is there no discussion in Netherlands to join the automatically generated part of a roundabout manually? Now it is just convenient if you have different relations (like a bus line) over the roundabout. Then you can indicate exactly which side a relation takes. Well, this is really not necessary because you drive the roundabout alwas in the same direction. In Germany we only have roundabouts made of ONE way. If you use the relation-editor of JOSM, than you can easily recgnize a roundabout. Would it not be easier, to use only ONE way in a roundabaout? I think this looks much tidier than when roundabouts are always one way. http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=51.32506lon=5.97571zoom=17layers=T Also, if you make a route over a roundabout, you never use the full roundabout, so why would you want the full roundabout in the relation? Of course this is true, but I think it looks tidier the other way, look here. You see at once, that there is a roundabout. http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=50.791022lon=6.059449zoom=18layers=T -- Mit freundlichen Gruessen Wolfgang Wienke ___ Talk-nl mailing list Talk-nl@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-nl
Re: [OSM-talk-nl] junction= roundabaout
I do think there are situations were you want do a full roundabout. Example: want toturn left on a road, but that is prohibited. Right is allowed and there is a nearby roundabout. Then you will do a full-turn. Hugo Op 22 nov. 2012 10:03 schreef Maarten Deen md...@xs4all.nl het volgende: On 2012-11-22 09:41, Wolfgang Wienke wrote: Am 22.11.2012 07:50, schrieb Maarten Deen: On 2012-11-21 20:48, Wolfgang Wienke wrote: Am 21.11.2012 18:48, schrieb Maarten Deen: On 11/21/2012 06:45 PM, Maarten Deen wrote: On 11/21/2012 06:41 PM, Wolfgang Wienke wrote: Hi, I'm mapping in NL near Aachen. Can someone tell me, why there is more that ONE way in a dutch roundabaout? There isn't. A roundabout is always one way. If there are two directions it is not a roundabout but a circular road. Just after sending this I realized that I must have misread your question. You mean why most roundabouts are made up of more than one way. Initially it is because of the AND import. The AND dataset was such that between every junction of 3 or more roads there was a sperate way. What means the AND dataset? AND donated their dataset in 2007 and was subsequently integraded into OSM. http://wiki.openstreetmap.**org/wiki/AND_Datahttp://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/AND_Data I do not find there any special about roundabouts. I think, that it is important to recognize a roundabout for navys to tell the user something like leave the rounabout at the second street. Is there no discussion in Netherlands to join the automatically generated part of a roundabout manually? No, because that is not necessary. The AND data was structured such that at every point where there is a juntion of three or more ways, a new way was created. You'll still see that in lots of parts of the Netherlands: http://www.openstreetmap.org/**?lat=51.319581lon=5.996067** zoom=18layers=Mhttp://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=51.319581lon=5.996067zoom=18layers=M It is not necessary that the road Lindanusstraat is split up in 5 parts, but that is how the AND dataset came. You'll notice the AND_nosr_r tags on these ways, so you can see it came from AND that way. The same with roundabouts. Because every connecting road is a point where 3 ways connect, it was a different way. Routing engines have no adverse effects from this. There is no (sell-respecting) routing engine that will tell you to continue for 100 metres a thousand times when the road is spilt up in smaller ways. So why would it do that on a roundabout? A roundabout is recognized by its tag: junction=roundabout. Not by its physical properties (a circular one-way street). Now it is just convenient if you have different relations (like a bus line) over the roundabout. Then you can indicate exactly which side a relation takes. Well, this is really not necessary because you drive the roundabout alwas in the same direction. In Germany we only have roundabouts made of ONE way. If you use the relation-editor of JOSM, than you can easily recgnize a roundabout. Would it not be easier, to use only ONE way in a roundabaout? I think this looks much tidier than when roundabouts are always one way. http://www.openstreetmap.org/**?lat=51.32506lon=5.97571** zoom=17layers=Thttp://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=51.32506lon=5.97571zoom=17layers=T Also, if you make a route over a roundabout, you never use the full roundabout, so why would you want the full roundabout in the relation? Of course this is true, but I think it looks tidier the other way, look here. You see at once, that there is a roundabout. http://www.openstreetmap.org/?**lat=50.791022lon=6.059449** zoom=18layers=Thttp://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=50.791022lon=6.059449zoom=18layers=T I don't see the difference there because it has only single ways connecting to the roundabout. But let me ask this simple question: if you go from A to B via a roundabout, do you traverse the whole roundabout or only a part of it? Why then add the full roundabout to a relation that describes the route from A to B? It is also clearer not to add the full roundabout. Take this example: http://www.openstreetmap.org/**?lat=51.333905lon=5.995042** zoom=18layers=Thttp://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=51.333905lon=5.995042zoom=18layers=T It is immediately clear that bus 62 goes from east to west. If you had the complete roundabout in the relation, the whole roundabout would be red and you would not know which direction the relation had. Regards, Maarten __**_ Talk-nl mailing list Talk-nl@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.**org/listinfo/talk-nlhttp://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-nl ___ Talk-nl mailing list Talk-nl@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-nl
Re: [OSM-talk-nl] junction= roundabaout
In that case you add all the ways of the roundabout to your route relation. You'll have to admit it's rather the exception than the rule. Jo 2012/11/22 Hugo Hölscher hugoholsc...@gmail.com I do think there are situations were you want do a full roundabout. Example: want toturn left on a road, but that is prohibited. Right is allowed and there is a nearby roundabout. Then you will do a full-turn. Hugo Op 22 nov. 2012 10:03 schreef Maarten Deen md...@xs4all.nl het volgende: On 2012-11-22 09:41, Wolfgang Wienke wrote: Am 22.11.2012 07:50, schrieb Maarten Deen: On 2012-11-21 20:48, Wolfgang Wienke wrote: Am 21.11.2012 18:48, schrieb Maarten Deen: On 11/21/2012 06:45 PM, Maarten Deen wrote: On 11/21/2012 06:41 PM, Wolfgang Wienke wrote: Hi, I'm mapping in NL near Aachen. Can someone tell me, why there is more that ONE way in a dutch roundabaout? There isn't. A roundabout is always one way. If there are two directions it is not a roundabout but a circular road. Just after sending this I realized that I must have misread your question. You mean why most roundabouts are made up of more than one way. Initially it is because of the AND import. The AND dataset was such that between every junction of 3 or more roads there was a sperate way. What means the AND dataset? AND donated their dataset in 2007 and was subsequently integraded into OSM. http://wiki.openstreetmap.**org/wiki/AND_Datahttp://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/AND_Data I do not find there any special about roundabouts. I think, that it is important to recognize a roundabout for navys to tell the user something like leave the rounabout at the second street. Is there no discussion in Netherlands to join the automatically generated part of a roundabout manually? No, because that is not necessary. The AND data was structured such that at every point where there is a juntion of three or more ways, a new way was created. You'll still see that in lots of parts of the Netherlands: http://www.openstreetmap.org/**?lat=51.319581lon=5.996067** zoom=18layers=Mhttp://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=51.319581lon=5.996067zoom=18layers=M It is not necessary that the road Lindanusstraat is split up in 5 parts, but that is how the AND dataset came. You'll notice the AND_nosr_r tags on these ways, so you can see it came from AND that way. The same with roundabouts. Because every connecting road is a point where 3 ways connect, it was a different way. Routing engines have no adverse effects from this. There is no (sell-respecting) routing engine that will tell you to continue for 100 metres a thousand times when the road is spilt up in smaller ways. So why would it do that on a roundabout? A roundabout is recognized by its tag: junction=roundabout. Not by its physical properties (a circular one-way street). Now it is just convenient if you have different relations (like a bus line) over the roundabout. Then you can indicate exactly which side a relation takes. Well, this is really not necessary because you drive the roundabout alwas in the same direction. In Germany we only have roundabouts made of ONE way. If you use the relation-editor of JOSM, than you can easily recgnize a roundabout. Would it not be easier, to use only ONE way in a roundabaout? I think this looks much tidier than when roundabouts are always one way. http://www.openstreetmap.org/**?lat=51.32506lon=5.97571** zoom=17layers=Thttp://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=51.32506lon=5.97571zoom=17layers=T Also, if you make a route over a roundabout, you never use the full roundabout, so why would you want the full roundabout in the relation? Of course this is true, but I think it looks tidier the other way, look here. You see at once, that there is a roundabout. http://www.openstreetmap.org/?**lat=50.791022lon=6.059449** zoom=18layers=Thttp://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=50.791022lon=6.059449zoom=18layers=T I don't see the difference there because it has only single ways connecting to the roundabout. But let me ask this simple question: if you go from A to B via a roundabout, do you traverse the whole roundabout or only a part of it? Why then add the full roundabout to a relation that describes the route from A to B? It is also clearer not to add the full roundabout. Take this example: http://www.openstreetmap.org/**?lat=51.333905lon=5.995042** zoom=18layers=Thttp://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=51.333905lon=5.995042zoom=18layers=T It is immediately clear that bus 62 goes from east to west. If you had the complete roundabout in the relation, the whole roundabout would be red and you would not know which direction the relation had. Regards, Maarten __**_ Talk-nl mailing list Talk-nl@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.**org/listinfo/talk-nlhttp://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-nl ___ Talk-nl
Re: [OSM-talk-nl] junction= roundabaout
Agree more the exeption then the rule. But any action which prohibits routing for this situation should be avoided, Hugo Op 22 nov. 2012 12:48 schreef Jo winfi...@gmail.com het volgende: In that case you add all the ways of the roundabout to your route relation. You'll have to admit it's rather the exception than the rule. Jo 2012/11/22 Hugo Hölscher hugoholsc...@gmail.com I do think there are situations were you want do a full roundabout. Example: want toturn left on a road, but that is prohibited. Right is allowed and there is a nearby roundabout. Then you will do a full-turn. Hugo Op 22 nov. 2012 10:03 schreef Maarten Deen md...@xs4all.nl het volgende: On 2012-11-22 09:41, Wolfgang Wienke wrote: Am 22.11.2012 07:50, schrieb Maarten Deen: On 2012-11-21 20:48, Wolfgang Wienke wrote: Am 21.11.2012 18:48, schrieb Maarten Deen: On 11/21/2012 06:45 PM, Maarten Deen wrote: On 11/21/2012 06:41 PM, Wolfgang Wienke wrote: Hi, I'm mapping in NL near Aachen. Can someone tell me, why there is more that ONE way in a dutch roundabaout? There isn't. A roundabout is always one way. If there are two directions it is not a roundabout but a circular road. Just after sending this I realized that I must have misread your question. You mean why most roundabouts are made up of more than one way. Initially it is because of the AND import. The AND dataset was such that between every junction of 3 or more roads there was a sperate way. What means the AND dataset? AND donated their dataset in 2007 and was subsequently integraded into OSM. http://wiki.openstreetmap.**org/wiki/AND_Datahttp://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/AND_Data I do not find there any special about roundabouts. I think, that it is important to recognize a roundabout for navys to tell the user something like leave the rounabout at the second street. Is there no discussion in Netherlands to join the automatically generated part of a roundabout manually? No, because that is not necessary. The AND data was structured such that at every point where there is a juntion of three or more ways, a new way was created. You'll still see that in lots of parts of the Netherlands: http://www.openstreetmap.org/**?lat=51.319581lon=5.996067** zoom=18layers=Mhttp://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=51.319581lon=5.996067zoom=18layers=M It is not necessary that the road Lindanusstraat is split up in 5 parts, but that is how the AND dataset came. You'll notice the AND_nosr_r tags on these ways, so you can see it came from AND that way. The same with roundabouts. Because every connecting road is a point where 3 ways connect, it was a different way. Routing engines have no adverse effects from this. There is no (sell-respecting) routing engine that will tell you to continue for 100 metres a thousand times when the road is spilt up in smaller ways. So why would it do that on a roundabout? A roundabout is recognized by its tag: junction=roundabout. Not by its physical properties (a circular one-way street). Now it is just convenient if you have different relations (like a bus line) over the roundabout. Then you can indicate exactly which side a relation takes. Well, this is really not necessary because you drive the roundabout alwas in the same direction. In Germany we only have roundabouts made of ONE way. If you use the relation-editor of JOSM, than you can easily recgnize a roundabout. Would it not be easier, to use only ONE way in a roundabaout? I think this looks much tidier than when roundabouts are always one way. http://www.openstreetmap.org/**?lat=51.32506lon=5.97571** zoom=17layers=Thttp://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=51.32506lon=5.97571zoom=17layers=T Also, if you make a route over a roundabout, you never use the full roundabout, so why would you want the full roundabout in the relation? Of course this is true, but I think it looks tidier the other way, look here. You see at once, that there is a roundabout. http://www.openstreetmap.org/?**lat=50.791022lon=6.059449** zoom=18layers=Thttp://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=50.791022lon=6.059449zoom=18layers=T I don't see the difference there because it has only single ways connecting to the roundabout. But let me ask this simple question: if you go from A to B via a roundabout, do you traverse the whole roundabout or only a part of it? Why then add the full roundabout to a relation that describes the route from A to B? It is also clearer not to add the full roundabout. Take this example: http://www.openstreetmap.org/**?lat=51.333905lon=5.995042** zoom=18layers=Thttp://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=51.333905lon=5.995042zoom=18layers=T It is immediately clear that bus 62 goes from east to west. If you had the complete roundabout in the relation, the whole roundabout would be red and you would not know which direction the relation had. Regards, Maarten __**_ Talk-nl
Re: [OSM-talk-nl] junction= roundabaout
We were talking about roundabouts that were split in their composing ways, nothing is impeding routing over a split roundabout, but the graph of the routes is not as nice/clear/unambiguous when the roundabouts are not split. Polyglot 2012/11/22 Hugo Hölscher hugoholsc...@gmail.com Agree more the exeption then the rule. But any action which prohibits routing for this situation should be avoided, Hugo Op 22 nov. 2012 12:48 schreef Jo winfi...@gmail.com het volgende: In that case you add all the ways of the roundabout to your route relation. You'll have to admit it's rather the exception than the rule. Jo 2012/11/22 Hugo Hölscher hugoholsc...@gmail.com I do think there are situations were you want do a full roundabout. Example: want toturn left on a road, but that is prohibited. Right is allowed and there is a nearby roundabout. Then you will do a full-turn. Hugo Op 22 nov. 2012 10:03 schreef Maarten Deen md...@xs4all.nl het volgende: On 2012-11-22 09:41, Wolfgang Wienke wrote: Am 22.11.2012 07:50, schrieb Maarten Deen: On 2012-11-21 20:48, Wolfgang Wienke wrote: Am 21.11.2012 18:48, schrieb Maarten Deen: On 11/21/2012 06:45 PM, Maarten Deen wrote: On 11/21/2012 06:41 PM, Wolfgang Wienke wrote: Hi, I'm mapping in NL near Aachen. Can someone tell me, why there is more that ONE way in a dutch roundabaout? There isn't. A roundabout is always one way. If there are two directions it is not a roundabout but a circular road. Just after sending this I realized that I must have misread your question. You mean why most roundabouts are made up of more than one way. Initially it is because of the AND import. The AND dataset was such that between every junction of 3 or more roads there was a sperate way. What means the AND dataset? AND donated their dataset in 2007 and was subsequently integraded into OSM. http://wiki.openstreetmap.**org/wiki/AND_Datahttp://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/AND_Data I do not find there any special about roundabouts. I think, that it is important to recognize a roundabout for navys to tell the user something like leave the rounabout at the second street. Is there no discussion in Netherlands to join the automatically generated part of a roundabout manually? No, because that is not necessary. The AND data was structured such that at every point where there is a juntion of three or more ways, a new way was created. You'll still see that in lots of parts of the Netherlands: http://www.openstreetmap.org/**?lat=51.319581lon=5.996067** zoom=18layers=Mhttp://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=51.319581lon=5.996067zoom=18layers=M It is not necessary that the road Lindanusstraat is split up in 5 parts, but that is how the AND dataset came. You'll notice the AND_nosr_r tags on these ways, so you can see it came from AND that way. The same with roundabouts. Because every connecting road is a point where 3 ways connect, it was a different way. Routing engines have no adverse effects from this. There is no (sell-respecting) routing engine that will tell you to continue for 100 metres a thousand times when the road is spilt up in smaller ways. So why would it do that on a roundabout? A roundabout is recognized by its tag: junction=roundabout. Not by its physical properties (a circular one-way street). Now it is just convenient if you have different relations (like a bus line) over the roundabout. Then you can indicate exactly which side a relation takes. Well, this is really not necessary because you drive the roundabout alwas in the same direction. In Germany we only have roundabouts made of ONE way. If you use the relation-editor of JOSM, than you can easily recgnize a roundabout. Would it not be easier, to use only ONE way in a roundabaout? I think this looks much tidier than when roundabouts are always one way. http://www.openstreetmap.org/**?lat=51.32506lon=5.97571** zoom=17layers=Thttp://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=51.32506lon=5.97571zoom=17layers=T Also, if you make a route over a roundabout, you never use the full roundabout, so why would you want the full roundabout in the relation? Of course this is true, but I think it looks tidier the other way, look here. You see at once, that there is a roundabout. http://www.openstreetmap.org/?**lat=50.791022lon=6.059449** zoom=18layers=Thttp://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=50.791022lon=6.059449zoom=18layers=T I don't see the difference there because it has only single ways connecting to the roundabout. But let me ask this simple question: if you go from A to B via a roundabout, do you traverse the whole roundabout or only a part of it? Why then add the full roundabout to a relation that describes the route from A to B? It is also clearer not to add the full roundabout. Take this example: http://www.openstreetmap.org/**?lat=51.333905lon=5.995042** zoom=18layers=Thttp://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=51.333905lon=5.995042zoom=18layers=T
Re: [OSM-talk-nl] junction= roundabaout
At the other way, as we do it in Holland every roundabout should be tags in a forward and backward way in relations when the roundabout is split up. One of the reasons relation get polluted. But your drawing argument is a illegal one. We do not map for the renderers. And all relations are two sided so always the whole roundabout is used. When you draw a route from a to be the routing software has to be smart enough to colour only the part of the roundabout from way a to be into the right direction. Met vriendelijke groeten Robert Elsenaar Maarten Deen md...@xs4all.nl schreef: On 2012-11-22 09:41, Wolfgang Wienke wrote: Am 22.11.2012 07:50, schrieb Maarten Deen: On 2012-11-21 20:48, Wolfgang Wienke wrote: Am 21.11.2012 18:48, schrieb Maarten Deen: On 11/21/2012 06:45 PM, Maarten Deen wrote: On 11/21/2012 06:41 PM, Wolfgang Wienke wrote: Hi, I'm mapping in NL near Aachen. Can someone tell me, why there is more that ONE way in a dutch roundabaout? There isn't. A roundabout is always one way. If there are two directions it is not a roundabout but a circular road. Just after sending this I realized that I must have misread your question. You mean why most roundabouts are made up of more than one way. Initially it is because of the AND import. The AND dataset was such that between every junction of 3 or more roads there was a sperate way. What means the AND dataset? AND donated their dataset in 2007 and was subsequently integraded into OSM. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/AND_Data I do not find there any special about roundabouts. I think, that it is important to recognize a roundabout for navys to tell the user something like leave the rounabout at the second street. Is there no discussion in Netherlands to join the automatically generated part of a roundabout manually? No, because that is not necessary. The AND data was structured such that at every point where there is a juntion of three or more ways, a new way was created. You'll still see that in lots of parts of the Netherlands: http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=51.319581lon=5.996067zoom=18layers=M It is not necessary that the road Lindanusstraat is split up in 5 parts, but that is how the AND dataset came. You'll notice the AND_nosr_r tags on these ways, so you can see it came from AND that way. The same with roundabouts. Because every connecting road is a point where 3 ways connect, it was a different way. Routing engines have no adverse effects from this. There is no (sell-respecting) routing engine that will tell you to continue for 100 metres a thousand times when the road is spilt up in smaller ways. So why would it do that on a roundabout? A roundabout is recognized by its tag: junction=roundabout. Not by its physical properties (a circular one-way street). Now it is just convenient if you have different relations (like a bus line) over the roundabout. Then you can indicate exactly which side a relation takes. Well, this is really not necessary because you drive the roundabout alwas in the same direction. In Germany we only have roundabouts made of ONE way. If you use the relation-editor of JOSM, than you can easily recgnize a roundabout. Would it not be easier, to use only ONE way in a roundabaout? I think this looks much tidier than when roundabouts are always one way. http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=51.32506lon=5.97571zoom=17layers=T Also, if you make a route over a roundabout, you never use the full roundabout, so why would you want the full roundabout in the relation? Of course this is true, but I think it looks tidier the other way, look here. You see at once, that there is a roundabout. http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=50.791022lon=6.059449zoom=18layers=T I don't see the difference there because it has only single ways connecting to the roundabout. But let me ask this simple question: if you go from A to B via a roundabout, do you traverse the whole roundabout or only a part of it? Why then add the full roundabout to a relation that describes the route from A to B? It is also clearer not to add the full roundabout. Take this example: http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=51.333905lon=5.995042zoom=18layers=T It is immediately clear that bus 62 goes from east to west. If you had the complete roundabout in the relation, the whole roundabout would be red and you would not know which direction the relation had. Regards, Maarten ___ Talk-nl mailing list Talk-nl@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-nl ___ Talk-nl mailing list Talk-nl@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-nl
Re: [OSM-talk-nl] junction= roundabaout
On 2012-11-22 12:23, Robert Elsenaar wrote: At the other way, as we do it in Holland every roundabout should be tags in a forward and backward way in relations when the roundabout is split up. One of the reasons relation get polluted. But your drawing argument is a illegal one. We do not map for the renderers. And all relations are two sided so always the whole roundabout is used. Not all relations are two sided. A lot of bus relations are from A to B with a second relation from B to A. Maarten ___ Talk-nl mailing list Talk-nl@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-nl
