On Wed, 10 Dec 2008 19:30:50 +1030 Darrin Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, 10 Dec 2008 19:33:26 +1100 > Liz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Wed, 10 Dec 2008, Darrin Smith wrote: > > > > It wasn't me you're talking about, was it? > > > > > > > > Matt > > > > > > No it wasn't :) > > > > But it could be me. > > I removed two last night traced from yahoo and because I had just > > been there and converted to "survey" the streets I noted that they > > were mini_roundabouts. > > But why remove the data ? The Australian mini-roundabout definition > is a convenience, if someone has gone the distance and put the > roundabout why REMOVE it, that's what I don't understand? Further to this compare the 2 roundabouts in the centre of this picture: (I use Google maps because the zoom level is better). http://maps.google.com.au/?ie=UTF8&ll=-34.861743,138.645389&spn=0.000793,0.001655&t=k&z=20 The left roundabout matches very closely the global definition of a mini_roundabout, in fact I can tell you from seeing it, the 'island' is a flat piece of concrete so you can drive straight over it if you wanted too :) (The tyre tracks get a lot closer to the 'island' too if you look closely). Whereas the right one similar to the ones in question, and you can't drive over it, in fact unless you're on two wheels you have little option but to slow down for it. And the tyre tracks have a noticable gap between them and the island, because it's raised. I really honestly don't see how you guys can consider them the same whilst if the right one was about 33% bigger it'd suddenly not be a 'mini' roundabout. -- =b _______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
