[OSM-talk] Divided roads proposal

[Steve Bennett]

On Sun, Dec 6, 2009 at 10:43 PM, Lester Caine <lester at lsces.co.uk> wrote:

> Many of the example pictures have end cases that need to be handled by
> separated
> roads, so why not just draw the reality on the ground?


Because, as someone else pointed out, "drawing the reality on the ground"
isn't the only, or even, best approach for mapping. The slightly more
abstract "this is a single road, divided" works better than "this is two
roads" in some cases.

It seems to me that to almost any proposal you could argue "why not just
draw the reality on the ground?":
Q: Can we have a cinema tag?
A: Why not just draw the reality on the ground? It's a building, with
chairs, a room with a projector...

Q: Can we have a swimming pool tag?
A: Why not just draw the reality on the ground? It's a waterway,
surface=tiles, foot=yes, bicycle=no...



> Having to add MORE
> complexity such as you can turn off this side of the road is just as wrong?


I don't think a single road with a single junction leading to a side road,
with a single tag, could possibly be construed as "more complex" than two
roads with an extra road for the gap.


> In many areas, the macro level view is complete and people are starting to
> look
> at the micro view. Just because a few areas 'might look better' in the
> macro
> view is no reason to remove the existing format,


I repeat: I am not proposing "removing" anything.

I'm proposing *adding* a tag, primarily to allow *adding* information about
*new* streets. It's possible this will mean that some streets that *would
have* been mapped as two roads will instead be mapped as one road, but it's
a stretch to call that "removing" anything.

(Sorry for the irritated tone, but...c'mon.)




> and I see little point adding
> tags for something that is hiding the micro view?
>

If and when roads are mapped as areas (in addition to ways), I'm sure you'll
be able to map the individual halves of the divided road to your heart's
content. Just like you'll be able to map every lane, every slipway, every
traffic island and every painted arrow.

Honestly though, the primary function of OSM is not "the micro view". We're
not primarily interested in centimetre perfect placement of lumps of
concrete. Are you really suggesting that we don't use a feature because it
might interfere with the micro view, even though it works better at the
macro view?

Steve
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20091207/a17d7d15/attachment.html>