[Talk-us] USBR 66 in Oklahoma

[Paul Johnson]

On Mon, Dec 5, 2016 at 8:28 AM, Volker Schmidt <voschix at gmail.com> wrote:

>
>
>
> Just a heads up, I'm noticing the relation for USBR 66 in Oklahoma is darn
>> near unmaintainable due to the sheer size of it, and I'm taking action now
>> to prevent the problem from getting far worse in the future.
>>
>> The fact that the west end of the relation ends on a dual carriageway
>> leading into Texas makes this relation extremely difficult to validate as
>> a
>> single relation.  This relation is presently over 1400 ways and is growing
>> thanks to lane tagging efforts in the region.  As this relation has a huge
>> number of dual and single carriageway segments, it's going to be easiest
>> to
>> split this into two relations by direction so at least editors can
>> properly
>> validate this relation.
>>
>
> Thanks for bringing this up. I have just ridden most of the proposed
> USBR66 from East to West and noticed that a  non-negligible part of the
> route is on one-way roads. I fully agree that the best solution is to have
> two relations, one for each direction. I have come to the same conclusion
> here in Italy where the problem is less the dual-carriageway issue, but the
> increasing number of roundabouts or inner-city one-way systems which have
> the same effect on bicycle routes.
> I think it's only natural to do it this way. We already do it regularly
> for bus routes.
>

I will clarify that I do feel a little bad about this only because there's
no editors that handle two-way relations that end on a dual carriageway
cleanly, thus being the primary driver for this change.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/attachments/20161205/52d14cd9/attachment.html>