On 05.03.19 01:01, Nick Bolten wrote: > 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?
That approach could work, yes – and it's one of the few practical options I can think of at the moment. (The other would be drawing an area:highway polygon around all the individual ways.) Unlike associatedStreet, which contains all street ways sharing the same name and can thus contain networks of essentially unbounded complexity, these relations should probably only span the stretch between two junctions, though. While I would want to cobble together a proof of concept implementation to be sure that I'm not overlooking anything, such a relation would probably to solve the issue from a data consumer point of view. Of course, it would have to actually be used by mappers to be helpful. > 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. In theory, the two approaches could peacefully coexist as long as tags for kerbs, parking:lane etc. on the street ways themselves (and highway=crossing nodes) remained available after drawing the separate ways – at the cost of duplication and therefore additional maintenance. There are some hurdles, though. Even mapping just sidewalks as a separate way tends to break stuff. For example, people understandably connect incoming footways only to the sidewalk way, not to the street way. So an application that filters out these separate ways, hoping to instead rely on tags on the street way, will find itself with missing connections to the pedestrian network. Of course, connecting the sidewalk to the highway with a relation would likely offer a solution to that issue, too. Tobias _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
