[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - area:highway
simone.saviolo at gmail.com
Thu May 12 09:09:50 BST 2011
2011/5/11 Tobias Knerr <osm at tobias-knerr.de>
> M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> >> If you follow the convention that each way should be drawn along the
> >> center of the real-world feature, then the width of e.g. a sidewalk can
> >> still be determined at any point along the road from just the single
> >> outline area and the way position.
> > no, if this would be possible there would be no sense at all to map
> > areas. You can't see sidewalks as "just another lane", because they
> > tend to be quite irregular in certain settings (unlike lanes which
> > usually keep their width and have no corners and other weird points).
> I don't think this contradicts my argument. Look at the cross-section of
> the road at any point:
> | * . . . . * |
> The vertical lines are road area outlines, the stars are sidewalk ways
> and the dots are other "lanes".
> If we make the assumption that each way marks the center of that "lane",
> we can easily calculate the width of the two sidewalks at this
> particular cut through the road: It's 2 times the width between the
> sidewalk and the area outline.
> How a cross-section of a road looks will of course vary a lot along the
> road - lanes, including sidewalks, might change their width, disappear
> entirely etc. But that isn't a problem as long as you can determine the
> road structure at each interesting point along the road.
So your point is that we should use width=* to describe that? How about
large sidewalks that get narrower were a bay of sort is reserved to cars
(bus stops, parkings)? Should I break the way of the street into three
parts, each with its own width?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Tagging