(I suppose your reply was meant to t...@? If not, sorry for posting it) On Mon, 24 Aug 2009 13:32:06 +0100, Matt Williams wrote:
> 2009/8/24 David Paleino <d.pale...@gmail.com>: > > On Sun, 23 Aug 2009 18:11:59 -0500, David Lynch wrote: > > > >> I suspect that I'd end up creating a set of ways that look something > >> like this, plus a whole bunch of oneway tags and turn restrictions: > >> > >> http://dl1050.dyndns.org:8888/images/osm/cfi.png > > > > Thanks for the suggestion -- but I'd avoid drawing different ways for > > different lanes in a single carriageway. > > In some cases it's acceptable to do that. As long as there's either a > physical barrier or a hard no-changing-lanes restriction between the > lanes in question. There's no physical barrier, and the lanes are divided by continuous lines -- that would be a no-changing-lanes restriction, but I'd still be uncomfortable with drawing two separate ways -- that doesn't reflect real world. Satellite image: http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=38.12436,13.355808&spn=0.001091,0.002411&t=k&z=19 (the street from NW is the one from S in my drawing -- http://imagebin.ca/view/SjGkG4.html ) If you zoom in, you can clearly see the horizontal signals (at least at the NW street, there's some shadow hiding those in the SW one). If there are no other suggestions, I'll try to think at something :/ Kindly, David -- . ''`. Debian maintainer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 ----|---- http://snipr.com/qa_page `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
