On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 8:05 AM, David Paleino <da...@debian.org> wrote: > >> Is this a solved problem, then? Any complaints with this approach >> (cause it looks damn pretty on mapnik, at least...) > > I remember someone complaining with me that routers not supporting > highway=* + area=yes in the same relation with a "normal" highway=*, > might get confused -- and that something like "landuse=road" would be > better. > I don't know which of the two to choose though.
Hmm. I prefer highway=* + area=yes, as IMHO the area is an integral feature of the road itself - not just a feature of the land on which the road sits. You could argue either way, though. As for routers getting confused, there are a couple of options: 1) the router can ignore all highway=* + area=yes areas (this also rules out routing across open areas, but might be suitable for car routers) 2) the router can ignore highway=* + area=yes areas IF there is also a corresponding highway=* WAY. This requires a relation to indicate which area "corresponds" to which way. I think type=area, role=center/role=area would work [1]. Other tags describing the road could then go on the relation, rather than the way and/or area. [1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Proposed/Area _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
