[OSM-talk] New tool in Potlatch 2 for areas that share a way

[Anthony]

On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 5:44 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
<dieterdreist at gmail.com> wrote:
> 2011/1/31 Steve Bennett <stevagewp at gmail.com>:
>> I think I agree with your earlier point that mp's are better than
>> colinear ways, but colinear ways are still better than parallel ways
>> for areas that do actually touch.
>
> Yes, parallel ways are actually to be considered errors in the case
> that the polygons really do touch

Agreed, although I'd like to point out that in a case where one of the
features is physical and one is virtual (for instance, a road and an
administrative boundary), I wouldn't classify that as features which
"touch", and I think parallel ways *are* a viable solution.

To wit, I'd say parallel ways are the proper solution for TIGER
boundaries which coincide with TIGER lines.  Especially when the way
is a dual carriageway.  Fixing dual carriageways which share nodes
with TIGER boundaries sucks.  Fortunately most TIGER boundaries
themselves suck, so a simple fix is to just delete the TIGER boundary.

(Note that there's no problem with two *boundaries* sharing nodes or
(preferably) ways.  I'm talking about a road sharing a way with a
boundary, which maybe is okay sometimes, but sometimes definitely is
not.)