Re: [Talk-us] State Route relations (was: Highway TaggingConsensustoImprove OSM (and address some of 41 latitude's concerns))

The potential problem I see is when you have a road that alternates frequently between single- and dual-carriageways (which many state routes do, and even a lot of US highways). How do you represent this in a single relation? 1) Put single-carriageways in once, with no role. Or, with

Re: [Talk-us] State Route relations (was: Highway TaggingConsensustoImprove OSM (and address some of 41 latitude's concerns))

Mike N. nice...@att.net writes: The potential problem I see is when you have a road that alternates frequently between single- and dual-carriageways (which many state routes do, and even a lot of US highways). How do you represent this in a single relation? 1) Put single-carriageways in

Re: [Talk-us] State Route relations (was: Highway TaggingConsensustoImprove OSM (and address some of 41 latitude's concerns))

On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 12:43 PM, Peter Budny pet...@gatech.edu wrote: Here's one instance where this doesn't work as well as I'd like: http://ra.osmsurround.org/analyze.jsp?relationId=271830 Michigan 3 (which I picked randomly off a list) alternates between single- and dual-carriageway.