On Sun, Jan 17, 2010 at 10:14 PM, Carsten Moeller <cmindivid...@gmx.de> wrote: > I do agree. Railways, aerialway etc. should be connected to highways. > But this should not be expressed by connecting same nodes. Here ramps or > links come into play. If you have a closer look at todays OSM-Data
I think there is a general need here to express "connections" separately from the ways themselves. In the case of bike paths (sorry to be a one tune band), They frequently seem to pass very near a road without there actually being an explicit piece of pavement connecting them. You want to map this "connection", but if you draw a "highway=cycleway", you're mapping something that is not technically there. Something as simple as "path=none" might suffice in a lot of instances, to indicate that a connection has all the other qualities of that way, but there is nothing to see physically. Whether or not such a thing should be rendered on a map is another, interesting question. Steve _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
