> In practice, almost all mapping seems to use approach (a) - but would > approach (b) be easier for subsequent editing and addition of detail, and > rather clearer as it avoids superimposed ways and potential editing errors?
I think that the correct way is b) - three separate lines. Since if the border of the farm also is somehow displayed (for example if it is fenced, thus having fenced=yes or barrier=fence tags), in the first case (all lines joined to one line) the border would go through center of the road, resulting in artifacts like fence in the middle of road. b) is easier for editing, more reflecting the reality and surprisingly, it also renders well - if the road is thicker than the gap, then it looks exactly like a), if not, then there may be some gap, but often there is at least some sidewalk or something, so the gap is justifiable - one can view the gap as sort of sidewalk :) And if the renderer knows proper width of the road (width=... tag) and can support it, there would be no or very minimal gap. If not, then the size of the gap will at least give you hint of size of the road (or exactly, size of the space where the road is). Martin _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
