On Wed, 22 Oct 2008 09:40:49 +1030 Kim Hawtin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Darrin Smith wrote: > > On Mon, 20 Oct 2008 21:22:20 -0700 (PDT) > > > >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > >> Looking at your B37 & Alexandrina & Flaxley Rd roundabout, you > >> don't need oneway=yes(it's implied), clockwise(just draw it in a > >> clockwise direction), ref(roundabout's don't inherit route > >> numbers, it's for when roundabout's have specific ref numbers [in > >> Europe I think]). > > > > Can you explain why that roundabout wouldn't have a B37, given it's > > actually part of the B37 route? If you leave out the B37 then you're > > leaving a gap in the B37 ref's, surely that is inconsistent? > > i didn't put this roundabout in, so when i see stuff like that its > hard to know what is the right thing to do unless we put it to the > list. It's been there for a while, my question was more directed at [EMAIL PROTECTED] in this case, I personally think the B37 should be there as it is (I'm probably the one who added that tag, can't be bothered confirming it right now ;) since you have to travel through it as part of travelling along the B37. > and i'm yet to find a decent resource for what roads are named routes. > i suppose i need to make notes from the big green signs huh ? =) That's how I've generally been finding them, having a little interest in highway routing I've been looking around for resources and the BGS's are the most reliable source I can find, even the old copyrighted sources are a bit lacking in accuracy. Unfortunately there are still a number of areas where even the BGS's are lacking although I have to give TransportSA credit, travelling around SA this year I've found a number of places where brand new signs with routes have been ereceted in the last couple of years (since I was last there) so I have some hope that sometime in the future the route system will be pretty consistent. > >> * Lots of the area's don't need area=yes, like > >> parking/schools/landuse etc. > > > > Is this yet another crazy OSM inconsistency? Surely any of those > > closed loops are implicitly areas? In fact I notice mappaint in > > josm tends to render closed versions of these as areas without any > > redundant area=yes tag, so I'm not alone in my thinking here. > > I've seen areas around adelaide where they specifically have. > it looks a whole lot better to see areas like commercial and schools > marked in, its easier to see and the labels are marked up better. > i don't understand how the renderer works, but putting in the area > attribute helps for the mapper to identify what the thing is for. > well it helps me get a better idea about what im editing anyway. =) ] Oh man! I feel like a wally :) I just re-read what bluemm was saying there and he's totally saying the same thing as me anyway! Can we just pretend I didn't write my original paragraph? :) -- Darrin Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
