[Tagging] Race track
waldo000000 at gmail.com
Mon Feb 1 04:33:55 GMT 2010
On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 12:35 PM, Dave F. <davefox at madasafish.com> wrote:
>> I'm not sure I understand. What I mean is, if the database contains a
>> way with highway=raceway, *as well as* a multi-polygon (MP) with
>> highway=raceway, how would a renderer know not to try to render *two
>> different raceways*? Is it their responsibility to check whether the
>> way is *within* the MP area, and then infer that it describes the
>> *same* raceway...?
> Well I'd refer you back to the river/riverbank example & give a
> different value for the mp; Kerb maybe or track_edge?
Ah I see... hmmm it works, but it seems a bit strange. I feel like I'm
marking a highway=raceway, not a highway=racewaybank... I'd hate to
have to invent a new tag for every feature that I want to mark as an
area (and as a way)...
>> I think it would be prudent to explicitly state this relationship
>> between the way (giving centerline) and the MP (giving area)...with a
>> relation. I think we could use , with type=area, role=center (for
>> the centerline way) and role=area (for the MP).
> This is new to me. What advantage would this bring?
> Out of curiosity was this discussed in any of the forums (Not that it
> had to to gain approval, of course)?
> Any working examples?
New to me, too - I found it via search. Note that it's still only in
/Proposed/. The advantages would be
1) No need to invent a new tag for each tag with an area-equivalent
(e.g. river vs. riverbank)
2) Gives users the option to use the way representation (for e.g.
routing) or the area representation (for e.g. rendering), while also
knowing that the two representations refer to the same entity. Tags
applying to the entity (e.g. the name of the race track) could be
applied to the relation only rather than (redundantly) to both
More information about the Tagging