[Talk-us] Fwd: [Warning: Potential Flamewar] Clarifying InterstateRelations

2010-02-08 Thread Chris Hunter
On Mon, Feb 8, 2010 at 6:30 PM, Richard Welty rwe...@averillpark.netwrote: there is a major disconnect between what people think is right and what the wiki calls for. from Agreed. One of the reasons I started this discussion was to make sure that what the wiki calls for is still right. As

Re: [Talk-us] Fwd: [Warning: Potential Flamewar] Clarifying InterstateRelations

2010-02-08 Thread Apollinaris Schoell
I'm happy to use either method, but one of the reasons why I prefer the 1-relation-per-direction method is that it lets me quickly find areas that need to be split into dual carriageways. same for me, Josm has good support for sorting and relations and checking for gaps. also the relation

Re: [Talk-us] Fwd: [Warning: Potential Flamewar] Clarifying InterstateRelations

2010-02-08 Thread Richard Welty
On 2/8/10 8:01 PM, Chris Hunter wrote: Moving back to one of my original questions, I think Nakor was the only one to respond to the 2 relations per state (1 relation each way) vs 1 relation with rolls per state question. The Diff code is a little tangled, but from the WIKI, it looks like

Re: [Talk-us] Fwd: [Warning: Potential Flamewar] Clarifying InterstateRelations

2010-02-08 Thread Nakor
On 02/08/2010 08:14 PM, Apollinaris Schoell wrote: same for me, Josm has good support for sorting and relations and checking for gaps. also the relation analyzer will flag them without errors then. this helped me so much when I tried to fix routing problems and a road is disconnected because