Hi guys On 11/08/11 11:56, Paul Williams wrote: > This morning, darren39 has fixed the unconnected way (125500644) Andy > mentioned (http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/8983662). > > A section of the A522 was also deleted in darren39's first changeset > after the block > (http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/62360148/history) and > replaced by a new way (version 1 of > http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/125500635/history). This new > way also wasn't connected to various other roads including the next > section northbound of the A522, but I reconnected it. > > I think it would be much better if he didn't keep deleting ways when > he wants to alter them and instead altered the existing way, to avoid > creating all these unconnected roads (and also make it easier to see > the history of the way).
Even though I'm a relative newbie to OSM (& and very much to this list) I think that this kind of activity needs to be discouraged. I got an Garmin Edge 705 just over a year ago and joined OSM to get a free map for it. OSM already had a good enough map for my area. Eastbourne. For my needs anyway - to track my cycling. I had read that support for routing on Garmin wasn't fully debugged yet and so it appeared to me. Recently I had course to use the 705 when I went to Eagle Heights [1] with a friend who don't have sat-nav in his car. My 705 plotted the same path Google Maps did, so I took it with me that day and it got us there and back perfectly. As a result I have been revisiting my previous assumption that it was the bugging routing support that was the problem with my 705 routing around Eastbourne. What I discovered was that there are (were?) unconnected cycle routes in the Eastbourne area and this was largely to blame for the poor routing I was getting. Yesterday I applied a patch [2] to the map to connect one of the major cycle routes need me to the road it parallels. This has made a vast improvement to the routing. Where before it took me down to the coast road (the cycle path was only connected to the road network at its end points) now it routes me almost perfectly. I still see a quirk [3], which I am unable to explain or fix. My best guess is that it is picking the service road (Fort Lane [4]) over the main road as better for cyclists. But if any knowledgeable person can enlighten me about what is really happening, thanks (and teach me what to look for and how to fix it for the future). Anyway the point, to the long rambling story, is to back up my first statement that darren39 editing methods should be discouraged. When I fist joined the Eastbourne maps looked good enough, so I didn't think I had to do much. Now I think that the routing quirks I was (and still am) getting are largely down to bad data in the database. I hope to be a little more proactive in "fixing" Eastbourne now. It may look pretty - but it isn't there functionally yet. It sounds to me that darren39's is reducing the functionality of the database. Steve [1] I personally recommend Eagle Heights to anyone interested in wild life, particularly birds of prey. http://www.eagleheights.co.uk/ [2] http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/8988011 [3] Screen shot of the Garmin Edge 705 http://twitpic.com/64qusi [4] Same area as [3] on OSM http://osm.org/go/0EAPbpiOo- -- Steve Dobson _______________________________________________ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb