On Sat, Dec 19, 2009 at 11:54 AM, Roy Wallace <waldo000...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Sure, and I see the logic - but the fact you needed to "think long and
> hard" means it's probably better if the routing can be fixed to cope
> with either kind of mapping.
>
Yes. Although if we're trying to make our map data work with routers we
can't fix (eg, Garmin), then we're in an interesting situation.
("Don't use Garmin" is not an answer.)
>Yeah, when I say "ROUTER fix", I don't necessarily mean Garmin
> themselves, I just mean *somewhere* in the chain of processing the raw
> data, a fix is necessary to be able to cope with shared roundabout
> entry/exit nodes (I don't know where though - not my area).
>
>
Automatically inserting extra ways? Could work. Would be good to decide once
and for all how to map these things rather than letting the current
ambiguity reign.
Not that "deciding" means we have to immediately go out and fix every
roundabout, but a clear "preferred" and "deprecated" demarcation is usually
good.
Steve
_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
