On 17.10.2014 15:40, Lukas Sommer wrote: > The downside is that in the example the cycleway would loose the connection > with the bridge area. While humans can understand that this is probably > another layer of the same bridge, it will be more difficult for software to > determine that this cycleway belongs to this bridge.
I already defined the criteria. The algorithm is trivial. > We could always share nodes with the bridge area > if it belongs to the same bridge - independent of the layer of the > individual ways. So it will be much easier for software to work with that > data. It may be easier to do something with the data, but whatever you do with wrong data will be a mess in the end. We'd better keep our data straight and leave it over to application developers to decide what to do with it. > Why not defining the outline for bridge areas as the widest part > of the bridge?) Yes, I think that the outline should enclose the whole bridge. > The connection of the cycleway with the bridge is maybe not > elegant. But I think doing so we can gain more of information quality and > usability than we risk to loose. Please don't talk of quality when condemning correctness. -- Friedrich K. Volkmann http://www.volki.at/ Adr.: Davidgasse 76-80/14/10, 1100 Wien, Austria _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
