[Talk-us] NoName and Roundabouts

Val Kartchner val42k at gmail.com
Fri Nov 26 23:48:43 GMT 2010


On Fri, 2010-11-26 at 00:13 -0800, Gregory Arenius wrote:
> Although most roundabouts aren't considered to be part of a way I
> there might be some that are named or are considered to be part of one
> of the attached streets.  I would just tag the unnamed roundabouts
> with noname=yes so that its explicit that they are unnamed.  NoName
> render recognizes the tag as well so it won't render as an error.
> 
> Cheers,
> Greg

I've tagged the roundabouts as you've suggested.  I'll see how it comes
out.  For a while there, NoName hadn't been rendering.  How quickly does
NoName render now?  Why was the MapLint layer removed from Potlatch?

> On Fri, 2010-11-26 at 16:16 -0500, Dale Puch wrote:
> Should it be marked?  probably not, but here are two other
> suggestions.
> Depending on the situation, perhaps use a mini-roundabout, or make the
> roundabout a split 1-way section in the main road.

What do you mean that it shouldn't be marked?  I didn't mark it as a
mini-roundabout because it does not fit this description from the wiki:
"The mini-roundabout usually does not have an island in the middle but
is painted on the road."  I also didn't do a split one-way because the
roundabout isn't really either of the ways but a special junction of the
two ways.

I also like that with the Garmin maps (though not the OSM-derived Garmin
maps) you will be told which exit (relative to where you enter) to use
for exit.

My comments are how I've been tagging roundabouts.  This is certainly
open for someone changing my mind though.  That's most of the reason I
ask here.

- Val -




More information about the Talk-us mailing list