On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 4:36 AM, Anthony<o...@inbox.org> wrote: > > You want to have two completely different ways to tag stop > signs? What's your solution? Stop signs are directional, whether they are > lane based or not.
+1 - I agree with Tobias and Anthony. John, I know you feel that solving the "lane" problem will solve the "stop sign" problem (indeed it might), but the stop sign problem *can be solved independently* (by indicating the direction or the junction to which it applies), and is a simpler problem to solve - so I think we should go ahead with this and vote for either the use of a way+node relation or a node+direction tag to denote a stop sign (I vote for relation for several reasons). > That makes no sense. You want to have lanes instead of ways? > > Lanes are ways. +1 John, perhaps we're missing something. Why do you want to add more tables to the DB? I don't see why you think using a relation is a "hack". You said, "just like a relation joins multiple ways, a way [should join] multiple lanes." From the wiki: "relations are basically groups of objects in which each object may take on a specific role." This sounds suitable for what you're suggesting. Have you seen http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/lane_and_lane_group, for example? _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
