[OSM-dev] ways with 'spurs'

[Jochen Topf]

On Sun, Feb 25, 2007 at 11:54:34PM +0000, Robert (Jamie) Munro wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> Barry Crabtree wrote:
> > I've come across some ways that go:
> > 
> >    A -> B -> C -> B -> D
> > 
> > Shouldn't they be done as:
> > 
> >    A -> B -> D, with a separate way B -> C?
> 
> IMHO, not if they're the same road, there's no point. I live in a
> cul-de-sac with fork in it, and it would be stupid to have to tag it
> twice, especially if this meant the name was rendered twice. Osmarender
> and osm2pgsql (i.e. MapNik) both do the right thing. If you make sure
> the first contiguous set of segments is the longest possible route,
> renderers will write the name along that part of the way.

Thats not true. Osmarender generally doesn't handle non-contigous and
forked ways well. It might work in some cases, but in many it doesn't.
Basically its an accident when it does. Don't rely on it.

Jochen
-- 
Jochen Topf  jochen at remote.org  http://www.remote.org/jochen/  +49-721-388298