[Tagging] Micro Mapping, was Race track

Roy Wallace waldo000000 at gmail.com
Mon Feb 1 05:50:57 GMT 2010


On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 3:26 PM, John Smith <deltafoxtrot256 at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 1 February 2010 14:21, Roy Wallace <waldo000000 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 1) use tags on nodes to describe an area
>> 2) use an area to describe an area
>>
>> Generally speaking, I predict 2) will be easier.
>
> Just like ways there is a lot of meta information to describe lanes,
> can you change lanes, do lanes have different speed limits, sure areas
> could be used for this, but the down side is you still need a way to
> describe the legal direction of travel, so the problem still exists an
> area alone doesn't describe everything.

Indeed. Hence why I have said multiple times that I think a way PLUS
an area is a better solution than trying to mangle the idea of an area
into "tags on nodes".

>> Erm no. You need to know along which direction the width is measured.
>
> A node is a point, the direction of width would be 90 degrees to the
> direction of travel.

See this drawing and tell me what the width tag means:
http://www.myimgs.net/images/puan.gif

> So the question still remains, how to describe a road way more
> accurately with a single object.

Why does it have to be a single object? A road has a centerline, and
it has a footprint. Why not map both...?

Here's a brainstorming picture, plenty of kinks to be worked out if
anyone's up for a challenge: http://www.myimgs.net/images/psgb.gif
E.g. if we're mapping ways as areas, how should the intersection
"area" be tagged?

Anyway, I'll now refrain from distracting you from writing up your proposal :)




More information about the Tagging mailing list