bluemm1975-...@yahoo.com wrote: > I completely agree with all of Darrin's points.
Fair 'nuff. > I'm a big fan of "mapping what's on the ground" and "don't tag for > the renderers/routers". As is everyone - but we can't forget that a linear road is always going to be a representation of a 2 dimension road surface, and currently that is what we have to work with in OSM. If you were drawing the full road width in OSM, the road wouldn't actually deviate at all for a mini-roundabout, it would just be drawn within the width of the road. Mapping a 4-node deviation in the road for a mini-roundabout isn't actually what is on the ground, either. The question remains, how to best represent what is on the ground. > I plan on submitting a proposal for the roundabout tag, where you > can add it to a node like a mini_roundabout, for use in simple > suburban type roundabouts. Something like junction: > inner_width=3mcould specify the island size, making it possible for > pretty rendering. Weird intersecting ways or large roundabouts would > have to continue as is. Oddly enough, these seems almost completely contrary to what Darrin is arguing, and aligns well with that I would like to see happen. I really don't care whether the tag is called mini_roundabout or something else, I think the junction is best represented by a single node. Darrin believes that it is better represented by have a loop. Ian. _______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
