[Talk-GB] traffic island mapping / harmful detail?
David Woolley
forums at david-woolley.me.uk
Thu Apr 8 14:55:23 UTC 2021
On 08/04/2021 15:25, Martin Wynne wrote:
> Nor does a footpath extend from a stile in the fence to a road's
> centreline. No walker ever walks to the centre of the road after
> crossing a stile. But every time I map that short bit of way as simply
> highway=yes for routing, someone changes it to footpath.
Maps are always abstractions. The problem here is that different places
and different people are using different levels of abstraction on the
same map.
Roads in route planner maps and as far as OS 1:50,000 paper maps, do
abstract roads as the centre lines, and, whilst paper and raster version
then represent those centre lines as having a width, related to road
type, not real width, digital map represent them with no width at all.
As such, continuing a footpath, as a footpath, seems the right thing to
do, even if you split the carriageways on the road.
Mapping the stub as highway=yes implies that motor vehicles can turn at
right angles to the traffic, even if they can't get very far.
More information about the Talk-GB
mailing list