Zitat Dave F.: > Nathan Edgars II wrote: >> Alexander Menk wrote: >> >>> is there any better way for mapping "very wide steps" (100 m, half >>> circle) instead of putting lots of steps next to each other. >>> >> >> highway=steps area=yes? >> >> > A very good question posed by Alex. I have a few wide steps (~50m) in my > city. > > It's a good start for a solution from Nathan,
IMHO "highway=steps area=yes" is the easiest way to mark steps as area. Unfortunately no renderer show it and routing applications will have also problems without a additional way element. But this should not prevent us from tagging steps as a area. > but it would need a > direction tag in order for the renderers to know which way the steps > went up & down. I wonder where is a really need for this information. Do you have a example? > A similar(ish) problem was brought up recently regarding routing over > pedestrian areas. They don't have an intrinsic direction in the way that > linear ways do. Was a solution found? Adding a way with the same attribution is my solution. > Off the top of my head I'm thinking of a line within the area that > defines the direction. it would have to be linked to the boundary by > using relations(?) If steps come up as a connection between other way elements, i think we need such a line element anyway. For example we can put a relevant information on the node represent the top of our step and doing the same on the other end. I wonder how to teach a renderer drawing "highway=steps area=yes" in a way, everybody will recognize it as such on a map. Maybe it is easy on square shapes, but what about half circles or waves? Just a idea: split the boundary in a top line, a bottom line and side lines and put it together with the way element mentioned above in a relation... -- Michael _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk