[OSM-talk] Divided roads proposal

Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdreist at gmail.com
Thu Dec 3 12:20:42 GMT 2009


2009/12/3 Steve Bennett <stevagewp at gmail.com>

> On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 10:15 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer
> <dieterdreist at gmail.com> wrote:
> > it allows to define things like: there is a kerb between the footway and
> the
> > street, but on given nodes there is a lowered kerb to crossover.
>
> Yes, it's certainly quite expressive, at the cost of complexity - and
> having to use relations.



+1


> One of the advantages of simply setting a
> "divider=" tag is its simplicity and succinctness. One tag, and you've
> got something that will render nicely, and be useful for routing.
>
>
but haven't we already barrier for this?


> I see four essential tag values:
>
> divider=none (can freely cross)
> divider=marked or something (do not route a car across this, but a
> pedestrian could cross it)
> divider=median_strip (again, do not route a car across this, but you
> could drive across it in an emergency)
> divider=barrier (a physical barrier that would probably stop a pedestrian)
>
>
yes, I see these as possible dividers/barriers for my proposed
area-relation. The area-relation allows optionally to add a
divider/barrier-role, which can be either area (e.g. if it is a very thick
irregular wall), way or node (nodes can be barriers, but also the opposite:
entrances (interruptions, openings), gates, lift_gates, lowered_kerbs, ...)

And it can solve the lane-problem (map lanes explicitly and do not confound
them with other highway-ways), connect bicycle-tracks to the adjacent road
and define the height of the kerb (without having to map the kerb, but
beeing able to map the kerb-lowerings), ....

cheers,
Martin
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20091203/aa918a20/attachment.html>


More information about the talk mailing list