[Talk-us] tagging cul-de-sacs

Martijn van Exel mvexel at gmail.com
Tue Apr 10 15:50:32 BST 2012

On 4/10/2012 8:39 AM, Peter Dobratz wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 10:17 AM, Martijn van Exel<mvexel at gmail.com>  wrote:
>> On 4/10/2012 7:46 AM, Peter Dobratz wrote:
>>> I'm experimenting with the Java code from Traveling Salesman
>>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Traveling_salesman
>>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/158307363
>>> Is this how people generally map these things?
>> No, I ususally tag the end node highway=turning_circle. There are so many of
>> them littered around US suburbia that mapping each and every one of them as
>> a circular way would make for a lot of not too useful data, not to mention a
>> lot of work.
> So we have 2 people in favor of discarding the circular portion of the
> Way and just using a node with highway=turning_circle.  I actually
> also use this approach on roads such as this:
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/157338683
> I distinguish between having a solid paved surface and a traffic
> island.  This seems to make sense based on the recommendations for
> dual carriage ways (presence of physical separation causing separate
> Ways).
> According to the wiki:
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dturning_circle:
> "There is no central island/reservation to a turning circle—it's
> simply a wider bit of road."
> Are you saying that you delete these circular portions of ways and
> replace with a node?
> Peter

Yes, I disagree with the strict definition (it is probably UK-biased). 
To me, a turning_circle is any dead end that has some form of design 
element that facilitates easy turning, whether there's an island or not.

Martijn van Exel

More information about the Talk-us mailing list