In that case you add all the ways of the roundabout to your route relation. You'll have to admit it's rather the exception than the rule.
Jo 2012/11/22 Hugo Hölscher <hugoholsc...@gmail.com> > I do think there are situations were you want do a full roundabout. > Example: want toturn left on a road, but that is prohibited. Right is > allowed and there is a nearby roundabout. Then you will do a full-turn. > Hugo > Op 22 nov. 2012 10:03 schreef "Maarten Deen" <md...@xs4all.nl> het > volgende: > > On 2012-11-22 09:41, Wolfgang Wienke wrote: >> >>> Am 22.11.2012 07:50, schrieb Maarten Deen: >>> >>>> On 2012-11-21 20:48, Wolfgang Wienke wrote: >>>> >>>>> Am 21.11.2012 18:48, schrieb Maarten Deen: >>>>> >>>>>> On 11/21/2012 06:45 PM, Maarten Deen wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On 11/21/2012 06:41 PM, Wolfgang Wienke wrote: >>>>>>> > Hi, >>>>>>> > I'm mapping in NL near Aachen. Can someone tell me, why there is >>>>>>> more >>>>>>> > that ONE way in a dutch roundabaout? >>>>>>> There isn't. A roundabout is always one way. If there are two >>>>>>> directions >>>>>>> it is not a roundabout but a circular road. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Just after sending this I realized that I must have misread your >>>>>> question. You mean why most roundabouts are made up of more than one >>>>>> way. >>>>>> >>>>>> Initially it is because of the AND import. The AND dataset was such >>>>>> that >>>>>> between every junction of 3 or more roads there was a sperate way. >>>>>> >>>>> What means the AND dataset? >>>>> >>>> >>>> AND donated their dataset in 2007 and was subsequently integraded into >>>> OSM. >>>> <http://wiki.openstreetmap.**org/wiki/AND_Data<http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/AND_Data> >>>> > >>>> >>> I do not find there any special about roundabouts. I think, that it >>> is important to recognize a roundabout for navys to tell the user >>> something like "leave the rounabout at the second street". >>> Is there no discussion in Netherlands to join the automatically >>> generated part of a roundabout manually? >>> >> >> No, because that is not necessary. >> The AND data was structured such that at every point where there is a >> juntion of three or more ways, a new way was created. You'll still see that >> in lots of parts of the Netherlands: >> <http://www.openstreetmap.org/**?lat=51.319581&lon=5.996067&** >> zoom=18&layers=M<http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=51.319581&lon=5.996067&zoom=18&layers=M> >> > >> >> It is not necessary that the road "Lindanusstraat" is split up in 5 >> parts, but that is how the AND dataset came. You'll notice the AND_nosr_r >> tags on these ways, so you can see it came from AND that way. The same with >> roundabouts. Because every connecting road is a point where 3 ways connect, >> it was a different way. >> >> Routing engines have no adverse effects from this. There is no >> (sell-respecting) routing engine that will tell you to "continue for 100 >> metres" a thousand times when the road is spilt up in smaller ways. So why >> would it do that on a roundabout? >> A roundabout is recognized by its tag: junction=roundabout. Not by its >> physical properties (a circular one-way street). >> >> Now it is just convenient if you have different relations (like a bus >>>>>> line) over the roundabout. Then you can indicate exactly which side a >>>>>> relation takes. >>>>>> >>>>> Well, this is really not necessary because you drive the roundabout >>>>> alwas in the same direction. >>>>> In Germany we only have roundabouts made of ONE way. If you use the >>>>> relation-editor of JOSM, than you can easily recgnize a roundabout. >>>>> Would it not be easier, to use only ONE way in a roundabaout? >>>>> >>>> >>>> I think this looks much tidier than when roundabouts are always one way. >>>> >>>> >>>> <http://www.openstreetmap.org/**?lat=51.32506&lon=5.97571&** >>>> zoom=17&layers=T<http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=51.32506&lon=5.97571&zoom=17&layers=T> >>>> > >>>> >>>> Also, if you make a route over a roundabout, you never use the full >>>> roundabout, so why would you want the full roundabout in the relation? >>>> >>> >>> Of course this is true, but I think it looks tidier the other way, >>> look here. You see at once, that there is a roundabout. >>> >>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/?**lat=50.791022&lon=6.059449&** >>> zoom=18&layers=T<http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=50.791022&lon=6.059449&zoom=18&layers=T> >>> >> >> I don't see the difference there because it has only single ways >> connecting to the roundabout. >> >> But let me ask this simple question: if you go from A to B via a >> roundabout, do you traverse the whole roundabout or only a part of it? Why >> then add the full roundabout to a relation that describes the route from A >> to B? >> >> It is also clearer not to add the full roundabout. Take this example: < >> http://www.openstreetmap.org/**?lat=51.333905&lon=5.995042&** >> zoom=18&layers=T<http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=51.333905&lon=5.995042&zoom=18&layers=T> >> > >> >> It is immediately clear that bus 62 goes from east to west. If you had >> the complete roundabout in the relation, the whole roundabout would be red >> and you would not know which direction the relation had. >> >> Regards, >> Maarten >> >> >> ______________________________**_________________ >> Talk-nl mailing list >> Talk-nl@openstreetmap.org >> http://lists.openstreetmap.**org/listinfo/talk-nl<http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-nl> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-nl mailing list > Talk-nl@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-nl > >
_______________________________________________ Talk-nl mailing list Talk-nl@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-nl
