[OSM-talk] Divided roads proposal

[Lester Caine]

Steve Bennett wrote:
> 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?

Why do you say THAT ?
Many of the additions currently being discussed ARE because the macro view is 
now complete, and adding the fine detail is now being carried out. There is no 
PRIMARY interest. Everybody has their own views on what is important!

I think my only problem with 'divided' is "At what point do you apply it?" The 
samples being shown are quite clearly - on the whole - dual carriageway 
structures. Example 10 clearly has a more complex structure than can be mapped 
by showing a 'divided' tag, since there is no access to the joining road from 
the other carriageway?

Example 6 has some quite complex slip roads that really need isolated ways for 
the main carriageway. Trying to ADD tags to supplement a simple 'divided' tag to 
explain the slips on and off at the end is handled much easier with a simple 
dual carriage way? And many of the other examples need the same end cases. So at 
what level does a simple 'divided' tag actually work in practice? However 
'double white lines' on a single carriage way road IS a divider that needs tagging?

-- 
Lester Caine - G8HFL
-----------------------------
Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact
L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk
EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/
Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk//
Firebird - http://www.firebirdsql.org/index.php