[Tagging] Draft Proposed Relationship Area Steps

Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdreist at gmail.com
Thu Mar 5 11:40:56 UTC 2015


2015-03-05 12:29 GMT+01:00 Janko Mihelić <janjko at gmail.com>:

> I'm pretty sure you don't need relations to define wide steps. All you
> need is an area (area:highway=steps) and one or more ways that connect the
> bottom and the top (we can decide if the direction of ways sets what is up,
> or incline=up). Just set the step_count=* tag, and you're good to go.
>


-0.3, for simple cases (those currently defined by the relation) you're
right that it could be done without a relation, but not with an area, you'd
have to use 3 ways, one upper, one lower, one connecting. If you use an
area, you won't know where the steps run and where they don't (save maybe
the simplest case of an area out of just 4 nodes).



>
> In case of more complicated steps, you can add a new tag,
> step_count:left=* and step_count:right=*, and put those ways on the
> dividing line, where you have a different number of steps on the left and
> on the right.
>


-1, this doesn't seem to work. I also can't imagine a situation where this
would occur actually, looks like a problem in the modelling (lower / upper
way not modelled correctly). Steps not being there is all a question where
you see the lateral boundary. Or maybe I am getting this wrong, can you
point to a real world example?



>
> That would be much simpler for everyone, from mappers to data consumers.



-1, I doubt it would be _much_ simpler, actually you'd have to draw more
ways and at least the same amount of tags. For data consumers it also seems
to be more complicated.

Cheers,
Martin
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20150305/84ac573d/attachment.html>


More information about the Tagging mailing list