[talk-au] Edits in and around Mt Barker, SA
beldin at beldin.org
Wed Oct 22 01:46:28 BST 2008
On Wed, 22 Oct 2008 09:40:49 +1030
Kim Hawtin <kim.hawtin at adelaide.edu.au> wrote:
> Darrin Smith wrote:
> > On Mon, 20 Oct 2008 21:22:20 -0700 (PDT)
> >> bluemm1975-osm at yahoo.com wrote:
> >> Looking at your B37 & Alexandrina & Flaxley Rd roundabout, you
> >> don't need oneway=yes(it's implied), clockwise(just draw it in a
> >> clockwise direction), ref(roundabout's don't inherit route
> >> numbers, it's for when roundabout's have specific ref numbers [in
> >> Europe I think]).
> > Can you explain why that roundabout wouldn't have a B37, given it's
> > actually part of the B37 route? If you leave out the B37 then you're
> > leaving a gap in the B37 ref's, surely that is inconsistent?
> i didn't put this roundabout in, so when i see stuff like that its
> hard to know what is the right thing to do unless we put it to the
It's been there for a while, my question was more directed at
bluemm1975-osm at yahoo.com in this case, I personally think the B37
should be there as it is (I'm probably the one who added that tag,
can't be bothered confirming it right now ;) since you have to travel
through it as part of travelling along the B37.
> and i'm yet to find a decent resource for what roads are named routes.
> i suppose i need to make notes from the big green signs huh ? =)
That's how I've generally been finding them, having a little interest
in highway routing I've been looking around for resources and the BGS's
are the most reliable source I can find, even the old copyrighted
sources are a bit lacking in accuracy. Unfortunately there are still
a number of areas where even the BGS's are lacking although I have to
give TransportSA credit, travelling around SA this year I've found a
number of places where brand new signs with routes have been ereceted
in the last couple of years (since I was last there) so I have some
hope that sometime in the future the route system will be pretty
> >> * Lots of the area's don't need area=yes, like
> >> parking/schools/landuse etc.
> > Is this yet another crazy OSM inconsistency? Surely any of those
> > closed loops are implicitly areas? In fact I notice mappaint in
> > josm tends to render closed versions of these as areas without any
> > redundant area=yes tag, so I'm not alone in my thinking here.
> I've seen areas around adelaide where they specifically have.
> it looks a whole lot better to see areas like commercial and schools
> marked in, its easier to see and the labels are marked up better.
> i don't understand how the renderer works, but putting in the area
> attribute helps for the mapper to identify what the thing is for.
> well it helps me get a better idea about what im editing anyway. =)
I feel like a wally :)
I just re-read what bluemm was saying there and he's totally saying the
same thing as me anyway!
Can we just pretend I didn't write my original paragraph? :)
sdar at salseast.org
More information about the Talk-au