[Talk-us] Interstate Highways Relations List

[Apollinaris Schoell]

On 12 Apr 2009, at 11:58 , Richard Weait wrote:

> On Sun, 2009-04-12 at 13:23 -0500, Joseph Jon Booker wrote:
>> On Sun, 12 Apr 2009 08:39:45 -0700
>> Apollinaris Schoell <aschoell at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 2 relations are easier. adding role to thousands of members is a
>>> pain. and we need to split relations with API 0.6 anyway
>>
>> So how do we handle the case where a US route is cosigned with an
>> interstate?
>>
>> 1. add both motorways to new route relations that signify the  
>> direction
>> of the original US route, and have no relation between those  
>> relations
>> and the original US route?
>> 2. Have both ways part of the original US route, with no direction
>> information?
>> 3. Same as number one, but have the new us routes added to a
>> "super-relation" for the original US route
>
> One relation for the Interstate.  One relation for the US Route.  They
> each have ways (or sub-relations) for members.  Where they are  
> cosigned,
> the ways or sub-relations are members of both relations.
>
yes this the best approach
and it avoids the ugly ref=US XXX;US YYY syntax on the ways


>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us