[Tagging] Micro Mapping, was Race track

Anthony osm at inbox.org
Mon Feb 1 03:19:32 GMT 2010

On Sun, Jan 31, 2010 at 8:38 PM, John Smith <deltafoxtrot256 at gmail.com>wrote:

> Going with Richards idea, what about making the editor do the grunt
> work, place a node at a point, and then have the editor calculate the
> width by stretching the road way side ways, then apply the width
> values against nodes, which would make areas redundent.

I've got no problem with letting the editor do the grunt work.  But a way
with a width is difficult to connect lengthwise to another way with a width,
or to an area.

> If we also define the numbe of lanes on a per node basis we wouldn't
> need to split ways just because lanes increased or descreased.

Way information should not be on nodes.  What happens when someone connects
a second way to the same node?  Now they have to examine the node to check
whether or not there are tags on it?  No.  Bad idea.


Now, I'm all about real world examples, so here's one:

Take a look at the Northbound traffic.  You have three main lanes of
traffic, two left turning lanes on the left, and a right turning lane on the
right.  You also have an entrance/exit to a shopping area on the right.
Now, good lane-based navigation software is going to let you know to get
into (or avoid) the right hand turning lane well before the shopping area
entrance.  This is not a six lane road, it's a three lane road with three
additional turning lanes.  However, traffic exiting the shopping area is not
limited to the right turning lane.  It can certainly enter the three main
lanes, and if you're feeling lucky (or if it's a low traffic time of the
day), can even make it into the left turning lanes.  This is a great case
for mapping lanes, and it's a tricky one to get right.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20100131/847a53a6/attachment.html>

More information about the Tagging mailing list