[OSM-talk] colour fills in osmarender

[Etienne]

On 6/9/06, Richard Fairhurst <richard at systemed.net> wrote:
>
> [big chunks of text quoted because Etienne's original went, I think
> erroneously, to me rather than to the list]


Sorry, I'm always doing that....

Quoting Etienne <80n80n at gmail.com>:
>
> > On 6/9/06, Richard Fairhurst <richard at systemed.net> wrote:
> >> Yes, agreed. So roundabouts could be:
> >>
> >> - defined as individual ways
> >> - multiple 'ref' tags, one for each road that meets at the roundabout
> >> (e.g. ref=A361,ref=A44,ref=A3400 - this avoids the need to say "turn
> >> onto the A361" then "turn back onto the A44", because you simply
> >> prefer the ref you're already on)
> >> - junction=roundabout
> >> - oneway=clockwise|anticlockwise
> >
> > I think I agree that roundabouts should be a way on its own that is
> > distinct from all the ways leading to it.
> >
> > The oneway attribute only needs to be true/false.  True meaning the
> > traffic is in the direction in which the nodes are ordered in the way,
> > false meaning the opposite.    I think it would be difficult to deduce
> > what clockwise means.  For example:
> >
> > <way oneway=clockwise>
> >  <node id=1 lat=50.926579090483266 lon=-1.7636343126730878 />
> >  <node id=2 lat=50.92650013591016 lon=-1.7633346667141547 />
> >  <node id=3 lat=50.92660735124737 lon=-1.7633605302878226 />
> >  <node id=1 lat=50.926579090483266 lon=-1.7636343126730878 />
> > </way>
> >
> > What is the clockwise order of these nodes?  And what is the algorithm
> > to derive this?
>
> Clockwise is "you turn left when coming onto the roundabout",
> anticlockwise is "you turn right". But I guess you're right,
> oneway=true|false would do.
>
> >> (In general, FWIW, my personal preference would be to simplify the
> >> data model by eliminating segments... but I'm not really that
> bothered.)
> >
> > I haven't heard anyone yet defend the need for segments as they are
> > currently defined.  I can't think of a good reason for them at the
> > moment - but then maybe someone has more insight than me and they
> > exist for a reason...
>
> Anyone?
>
> Hey, let's see if we can reinvent the whole OSM data model while
> Steve's in SF and see if he notices. ;)


It would be nice to get some insight into some of the design decisions that
have been made.  There may be genius at work that we just don't get yet.
But there are some characteristics of ways that do need to be sorted out or
explained...


Etienne

cheers
> Richard
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> talk mailing list
> talk at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20060609/6d7ef7e1/attachment.html>