[Talk-us] question: relations & divided highways

[Apollinaris Schoell]

I have always used 2 for multiple reasons.
- they have different signs and if you add direction tag with same  
info to the relation routing software can use it. commercial navis are  
doing it too.
- putting the info on a role is lot of work and prone to errors. Josm  
improved lately but it is still a pain to select single members and  
assign the correct roles.
- JOSM relation edito supports sorting members and this gives an  
amazingly easy and simple way to check completeness and direction of  
all members. If you mix 2 directions in one relations this is much  
more difficult.
- relation checker will flag the route a broken. again very difficult  
to verify and fix
- number of members can be huge for most interstates. breaking it by  
direction is simple
- I know it's not yet supported but rendering shields in an  
application should be much easier with 2 relations.
- you can always create a parent relation with both directions attached

--
apo

On 4 Sep 2009, at 7:06 , Richard Welty wrote:

> i've recently finished up a relation for I-90 eastbound from I-481
> (Syracuse NY) to the NY/MA border.
>
> i'm wondering which of the following methods is preferred for the
> westbound leg:
>
> 1) same relation, set role to west
>
> 2) different relation for west bound.
>
> i can go either way right now with no real difference in the amount of
> work. i'm just wondering
> what is considered preferable. i do see that there are a couple of  
> other
> relations for segments of
> I-90 kicking around, which seem to be one relation for both  
> directions,
> perhaps this is a clue that
> i should go with option 1 above.
>
> thanks,
>    richard
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us