[OSM-talk] The Return of the Highway tags and other junk

[Kristian Thy]

On Mon, Dec 18, Ben Robbins wrote:
> >The reason for staying with nodes is, as Dirk (I think it was) pointed
> >out: these features are, *topologically speaking*, without extent. This
> >isn't OpenTopographicalMap or OpenLanduseMap, it's a streetmap - and
> >streets are about topology.
> 
> The name openstreetmap is irelevent now, as it is a lot bigger project than 
> that.  Hence highway=footway.  or abutters, or amenties.

Footways, abutters and amenities are marked on all street maps I own.
 
> >A map, and especially a street map, is an abstract way of representing a
> >topological network with certain tradeoffs in accuracy being made in
> >order to increase usability and legibility. Some of these include
> >drawing roads wider than they are in scale, representing physically
> >linear but small features as points, etc.
> 
> Although true that we may widen roads, that arguement doesnt hold up to 
> well.  If we make wides bigger, then why are you proposing making gates 
> infintly smaller?.

To sum up your position: Because I support drawing streets wider than
they really are, it makes no sense for me to support making gates
smaller than they are. Is this a correct interpretation of your
argument?

> Please answer this.   If you don't wish to tag gates, or tracks, or a hedge 
> row, why does that mean others should not be able to?

Nowhere have I said I don't want to tag gates. Nowhere have I implied
that others shouldn't be able to.

\\kristian
-- 
Cthulhu.call();