[OSM-talk] [OSM-dev] ways with 'spurs'

[Simon Hewison]

Barry Crabtree wrote:
> Contentious? Where is the contention :-) Surely a way would never double 
> back on itself? Isn't it as wrong as a zero length segment? I understand 
> the debate about forked/looped/disjoint ways. I can see how they can be 
> *logically* fine but a complete pain for a rendering engine. In this 
> case we have a way that overlaps itself. I can't see how that can be ok!

A way doubling back on itself, like a roundabout, perhaps?

Admittedly, the preferred way of drawing a large roundabout is a way for the 
main flow of the roundabout, and separate ways for the roads that meet it.

--
Simon Hewison