On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 10:21 AM, John Henderson <snow...@gmx.com> wrote: > Other than de-cluttering (which tends to be done automatically anyway) > I'm not sure why you'd want to render only one set of lights if there > were more than that.
Well, because to most people a "set of lights" covers a whole intersection. If there are lights northbound, southbound, eastbound and westbound, that would be one "set of lights" to most people. You could equally ask, why would you want to render 4 sets of lights when there is only one? > In this case, placing the lights accurately in their lane gives the > correct count whereas it's your system which doubles up the number! Heh, you could be right. I think the relation scheme David referred to would be the way to go. > Whether on not an intersection has lights for a particular vehicle often > depends on the exact roure taken through that intersection. To > oversimplify can often be to mislead. Often? Apart from left-turning sliplanes, are there other cases? Steve _______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
