[Tagging] Self explanatory?

Martin Vonwald imagic.osm at gmail.com
Mon Dec 10 15:38:42 GMT 2012

2012/12/8 Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdreist at gmail.com>:
> 2012/12/8 Martin Vonwald <imagic.osm at gmail.com>:
>> currently used tagging styles and added my solution. I would like to
>> ask you to have a look at the following images and tell me if you
>> understand what's going on. Please don't comment on the underlying
>> tagging styles - I randomly selected some I know (and may or may not
>> support them).
>> http://www.vonwald.info/osm/images/Self_explanatory_1.jpeg
>> http://www.vonwald.info/osm/images/Self_explanatory_2.jpeg
>> http://www.vonwald.info/osm/images/Self_explanatory_3.jpeg
>> http://www.vonwald.info/osm/images/Self_explanatory_4.jpeg
> I think this is confusing, but this is just because this mapping style
> is not introduced and if there were good arguments I think we could
> get used to it.
> I also think that some are not very good examples because they could
> be better in the geometric detail, for instance this one:
> http://www.vonwald.info/osm/images/Self_explanatory_1.jpeg
> I'd expect to see this represented by a way that goes straight and has
> a crossing (or exit link) turning slightly to the right, instead in
> the example it seems as if there is a "V"-crossing with the leftern
> (straight) part more inclined than the actually turning one (link).

If you draw the OSM way in the middle of the carriage way you can't
draw a straight line here. If you don't draw the OSM way in the middle
of the carriage way the rendering result will be wrong, because
renderers assume that the OSM way is in the middle.

> As for your triangles: if we should choose to represent these
> situations (bifurcations of carriageways) in a way similar to these
> examples they should still not be areas (or closed ways).

What options do we have?
* Tag only the nodes. This would be near to invisible even if the
editors would show those nodes more prominent and for the consumers if
would be harder to use (I guess).
* Use a relation and put all the nodes into it. I thought about a
minute what I should write here... I decided to only write this:
relation! ;-)
* Connect all the involved nodes with a way. Good visible in all
current editors without any change. The consumers should be able to
interpret this more easily compared to the nodes-only solution.

That's why I went for the way. Closed or not doesn't really matter here.


More information about the Tagging mailing list