For anyone interested in listening to Lou Huang's talk, I found it on Youtube. It starts at about 42:00 and ends at 48:00
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xOGsy9BFJ5Y On Mon, Mar 4, 2019 at 4:02 PM Nick Bolten <nbol...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Can we please first define a solution (e.g. a relation) for connecting > such separately mapped components of a road to the highway? > > I agree, this is a very important issue and it happens for a lot of > different situations - a lot of different features that can and are mapped > separately would benefit from a street <-> separate feature mapping. This > is the incentive behind mapping streets, auto lanes, bus lanes, bicycle > lanes, sidewalks, verges, etc. on the street: the relationship query is > unnecessary, the information is shared in the way. > > Stable IDs would help with this problem, but I haven't seen much traction > behind adding core features to data types. What would you think of a new > 'associatedStreet'-style relation that would organize the various features > that should be associated between streets and the surrounding environment? > Example members (with no particular naming/role conventions in mind): > > - The street way(s). > - Any separate bicycle way(s). > - Left sidewalk way(s) > - Right sidewalk way(s) > - Left curb(s) > - Right curb(s) > > Other info that *might* benefit from either this or a similar relation: > - Building(s) / addresses (as France does) > - Greenways (trees / tree lines / verges) > - Traffic islands (a common use case for barrier=kerb ways > - Some street signs (some should probably be in a different relation > involving more than one way) > > This is certainly a lot of members, and not all are necessary, but I think > there's value in traversing between these data in, as you mention, a > machine-readable way. > > > This fundamental limitation really needs to be addressed before we > consider splitting roads into even more parallel ways. > > Just to clarify, the road can keep all of its same data as is currently > mapped. This would be an additional piece of information that tends to go > unmapped. > > Best, > > Nick > > On Mon, Mar 4, 2019 at 12:05 PM Tobias Knerr <o...@tobias-knerr.de> wrote: > >> On 03.03.19 20:12, Nick Bolten wrote: >> > I wanted to get a discussion started to see what people think of >> > mapping curbs as ways. >> >> Can we please first define a solution (e.g. a relation) for connecting >> such separately mapped components of a road to the highway? >> >> Painting lines next to each other fails to express the important >> information that this kerb/sidewalk/cycleway is part of that highway >> over there. Such missing information may be easily guessed by a human >> viewer, but it's currently not available in a machine-readable form. >> >> This fundamental limitation really needs to be addressed before we >> consider splitting roads into even more parallel ways. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Tagging mailing list >> Tagging@openstreetmap.org >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >> > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > -- @osm_seattle osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging