It was also not my idea to use relations to combine different road
objects to one road 'relation'.
-Robert-
Citeren Richard Mann <richard.mann.westoxf...@gmail.com>:
On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 3:26 AM, Steve Bennett <stevag...@gmail.com> wrote:
On 11/01/2011 12:20 AM, Richard Mann wrote:
The user who'd prefer to use highway=cycleway ways doesn't
know that the cycleway=track is a duplicate, but routers only have to
give a slight preference for highway=cycleway over cycleway=track to
use the "right" one (and even if they use the "wrong" one, it doesn't
much matter anyway).
IMHO, this is being extremely optimistic about the powers of a router. So
you're saying that a router could see the "adjacent=yes", then locate a
nearby cycleway which is "adjacent" in some way, and conclude that the two
refer to the same thing?
My suggestion: let's get a relation happening, asap. Something like:
No, I'm saying the router doesn't need to know. If they have two
almost identical paths in their network alongside one another, it
doesn't matter which they pick.
As for a relation - it's too complicated. What happens if the ways are
different lengths. What happens when someone chops one way in two
because of something else happening (etc etc etc). Relations are
inherently complex: only use them for things that people will readily
understand.
Richard
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging