[OSM-newbies] Interior ring with Potlatch?

[Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason]

On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 14:15, Steve Bennett <stevagewp at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 12:51 AM, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
> <avarab at gmail.com> wrote:
>> That's the right way to do it. Just because the validator whines about
>> something that doesn't mean it's incorrect. It complains loudly about
>> e.g. boundary areas sharing ways even though that's the best practice.
>
> The validator complains about colinear ways? Wtf? Definitely best
> practice, as far as I'm concerned.
>
> (By sharing ways, I mean that several nodes are part of two distinct
> ways - not two nodes almost on top of each other.)
>
> Btw, I'm starting to question the fact we don't do it with roads
> though. The logic goes that the line represents the middle of the
> road, and having an area touch the line would mean that the area goes
> up to the middle of the road. I would argue that the line represents
> the middle of the road *plus an arbitrary width*. When a footway
> touches a road node, it doesn't mean that the middle of the road is
> the middle of the footway. It means that road plus arbitrary width =
> footway plus arbitrary width.

Who is "we"? Some of us map just as you suggest, when I'm mapping e.g.
landuse areas that are marked by some road I'll make the landuse area
share nodes with the way.