2011/5/12 Stefan Bethke <s...@lassitu.de> > Am 12.05.2011 um 10:50 schrieb Tobias Knerr: > > > Sorry for my previous unfinished mail, I didn't want to send it. > > > > To summarize what I intended to say: > > > > * I assume that most road shapes are adequately described with just a > > single outline area for the entire road, and no one has provided a > > counter example yet. > > Ever been to any city? Should I post photos just looking out the window > here? What examples to you need? What is this assumption of yours based > on? > > > * If everyone mapped road parts as separate areas, it would actually > > make it *easier* for me to support them in my application. But it seems > > like an excessive amount of effort for mappers. > > Ultimately, that's up to the mappers to decide. I think it'll be a while > before I would get around mapping to this level of detail, but I won't stop > anyone putting in the work. > > > * For some applications, it will be necessary to reconstruct the entire > > road from the various separate ways, and I assume that an area around > > the entire road could reduce the amount of guessing involved. Of course, > > that's not the purpose the area:highway key was originally invented for. > > There already is a concrete requirement to have the different spaces (for > vehicles, bikes, pedestrians) represented appropriately, plus visually > impaired users who would love to get information on physical features of > these. By mapping both a conventional highway=* way as well as an area, > applications can decide what level of detail they're interested in. The > areas are complementary to the ways; they don't replace them, just as with > waterways. >
+1 about everything. You worded it great. Stefan > Ciao, Simone
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging