[OSM-talk] Shared nodes between non-routable objects?

[Alex Mauer]

On 07/12/2010 03:22 PM, Alan Mintz wrote:
> Exactly. +1. In the case described (building and attached parking lot),
> it makes sense, as it usually does for adjacent land parcels (landuse=*
> closed ways) and administrative subdivisions (boundary=administrative
> closed ways) too. If they really are two polygons of a similar type that
> share a single interface (edge), then glue them. If they just happen to
> have parts that seem to lie in the same place, don't.

Another case where I’ve found it especially useful to share nodes, even
between routable and non-routable objects, is for speed limits.  In at
least one case that I’m aware of, the speed limit is defined in the law
as “on XXX street, from YYY street westerly to the city limits”.  The
node where the speed limit-changing way split is located should also be
part of the polygon that describes the city limits.
—Alex Mauer “hawke”

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 554 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20100712/cd8cdc26/attachment.pgp>