[talk-au] Victorian Coastline

4x4falcon info at 4x4falcon.com
Thu Jan 27 04:10:13 GMT 2011

On 26/01/11 20:00, Steve Bennett wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 8:46 PM, 4x4falcon<info at 4x4falcon.com>  wrote:
>> Don't duplicate nodes or ways and don't join physical to non-physical.
> Why not, and why not? Not to be rude, but it seems there are a few
> different opinions around, so I think we give reasons for our
> preferences.

Physical things can change (eg road or railway realignment), non 
physical don't necessarily change.  In the case of boundaries do we 
definitely know that when a road is realigned does the boundary change 
with it.  This has been discussed many times since the import of the ABS 
boundary data.

>> When I say just outside the two nodes can be immediately side by side
>> (infact touching), they do not need to be metres apart, so that there are
>> two distinct nodes.
> So why is that a better solution than simply having the two ways
> colinear? (Again, I'm not saying it's not...but please explain your
> thinking.)

Rendering it appears to be the same line and therefore shows no 
differently to a duplicated node/colinear way, even at the greatest zoom 

For editing (particularly for new users) it is easier to select which 
one to edit (particularly in potlatch) and not try to select the correct 
one using the appropriate keyboard shortcut which is not immediately 


More information about the Talk-au mailing list