<html>
<head>
</head>
<body class='hmmessage'><div dir='ltr'>
<style><!--
.hmmessage P
{
margin:0px;
padding:0px
}
body.hmmessage
{
font-size: 12pt;
font-family:Calibri
}
--></style>
<div dir="ltr">> From: martijnv@telenav.com<br><div>> Date: Sat, 9 Nov 2013 11:31:55 -0500<br>> To: rickmastfan67@hotmail.com<br>> CC: stevec@telenav.com; kristenk@telenav.com; roberts@telenav.com; chrisz@telenav.com; talk-us@openstreetmap.org<br>> Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Complex intersection mapping<br>> <br>> James,<br>> <br>> Thanks for the feedback. This is of course not good. I will make sure<br>> we will be more careful with both the lane counts and the relations<br>> not getting broken! I apologize. Did you fix the relations? If not I<br>> will.<br>> <br><br>I hadn't yet since I wanted to wait till you responded on the list first so you could see what I was talking about (Changeset 18789658).<br><br>> The case you highlighted - I agree this one would be just fine as a<br>> single node.<br><br>That's how I'm going to repair that intersection & the relations that were effected, by just reverting Changeset 18789658 to return it to the way it was before yesterday.<br><br>> The guidance I have been giving, based on previous<br>> discussion in this thread, was to only 'dualize' the intersection when<br>> the dual carriageway clearly continues past the intersection. Does<br>> that make sense?<br><br>Yep, that does make perfect sense to me. That's how I've personally been doing it.<br><br>>I will make sure we adhere to that guideline and not<br>> overcomplexify situations that don't require it from a ground trouth<br>> perspective.<br>> <br>> Martijn<br><br>Sounds good Martijn. Thanks again for responding back on this subject. :) I'll now go ahead and do the revert of Changeset 18789658.<br><br>-James<br></div></div>
</div></body>
</html>