In response to the latest round of bugs, i wrote bug 13:Too many tags. When writing the page, i found the solution is always in the clarity of the argument. When the argument is so clear, there's even less arguments. :-)
Look forward to any feedback. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Canvec2osm#Bug_13:_Too_Many_Tags Cheers, Sam Vekemans Across Canada Trails Twitter: @Acrosscanada Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/sam.vekemans On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 2:59 PM, Sam Vekemans <acrosscanadatra...@gmail.com>wrote: > Good point. > Each road SHOULD be a relation which is made up of street (address > block numbered sections). > Geobase already does this 1st part well. > What if we start doing this:? > > Create a relation route, called 'theNameOfTheRoad' and have it > attributed to each segment. And step 2 would be to remove just the > 'name=*' tag. > The surface type and class designation would remain with each way segment. > > So... Why not train the renders to ... Automagically check for a relation? > > Or maybe just render intersecting roads with the same name, to behave > like a solid road? > > This would make house numbering and using the roads easier. > > On 6/17/09, Michael Barabanov <michael.baraba...@gmail.com> wrote: > > (Sorry for repeating myself) it's not only splitting; larger > > streets and highways consist of a way for each direction in GeoBase. > > This is also the recommended way to map those in OSM (see for example > > http://josm.openstreetmap.de/wiki/Introduction, Conventions), but often > > they are not, at least in the areas I've looked into. > > This additional complication has to be taken into account while > > automating the process. > > > > Michael. > > > > On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 04:31:06PM -0400, Richard Degelder > > (rtdegel...@gmail.com) wrote: > >> On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 2:02 PM, SteveC <st...@asklater.com> wrote: > >> > >> > > >> > On 12 Jun 2009, at 18:54, Richard Degelder wrote: > >> > > >> > William Lachance wrote: > >> >> > >> >> Look at this from another angle: Should we split up all the existing > >> >> OSM > >> >> road data that people have put in to add in GeoBase UUID information? > >> >> The simple answer is that at some point we are going to have to. > >> >> > >> >> If we want to add the attributes available from GeoBase, and to be > able > >> >> to > >> >> update it from future GeoBase updates, then we are going to have to > >> >> find a > >> >> way to add the GeoBase UUID information and, > >> >> > >> > > >> > Stupid question but my understanding is that TIGER claims to reuse > UIDs > >> > from release to release but doesn't really. So, what is the > probability > >> > with > >> > GeoBase? Just saying it might be worth thinking about before doing all > >> > the > >> > work. > >> > > >> > >> I may not be the best person to answer the question, I can easily think > of > >> a > >> few others that would be better qualified, but it is my understanding > that > >> the GeoBase UUIDs, the NIDs, are persistent and the primary means of > >> identifying a segment or item. Currently we are importing the new data > >> from > >> GeoBase and leaving the current user input data alone but if we want to > >> take > >> advantage of the extra data that comes from GeoBase we are going to have > >> to > >> find a way to split the current ways to add the data, such as the > GeoBase > >> NIDs and street names, at some point. > >> > >> I am hoping that we can do so in a manner that will not require users to > >> manually do the splitting but that a script can be written to do most of > >> the > >> work for us. There are probably going to be points where we are going > to > >> have to look at the data and make corrections but they should, very > >> hopefully, be infrequent. Once the ways are split we can use other > tools, > >> possibly RoadMatcher, to transfer data from GeoBase to OSM to fill out > the > >> map even more. > >> > >> Steve Singer, the person who is doing most of the work with the import > of > >> the GeoBase data, pointed out recently that there were new updates for > >> areas > >> that he had already imported the data and so we have the oppertunity to > >> really test the ability to update OSM from a GeoBase update. > >> > >> > >> > >> > Best > >> > > >> > Steve > >> > > >> > Richard Degelder > > > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Talk-ca mailing list > >> talk...@openstreetmap.org > >> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Talk-ca mailing list > > talk...@openstreetmap.org > > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca > > > > > -- > Twitter: @Acrosscanada > Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/sam.vekemans >
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk