On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 11:57:47AM -0800, Paul Norman wrote: > On 11/21/2014 10:09 AM, Stefan Baebler wrote: > >From the bugfix perspective it should probably be one more step of merging > >(eg MergeWays()) after two prior merges (mergePoints() and > >mergeWayPoints()). > Yes - and this shouldn't be too computationally expensive, as there aren't > that many ways, at least compared to points.
I am not sure this is enough. We might have to split up linestrings, too. Say you have something like this: A---B | | D---C | | E---F with linestrings A-B-C-D-A and D-C-F-E-D. In this simple case two closed ways with the same nodes as those linestrings is fine, ie both using the nodes D and C. But in a more complex case with more nodes and maybe some other lines involved, we probably want two multipolygons which share a way D-C (and have separate ways D-A-B-C and D-E-F-C, respectively), don't we? But then we have to split up those linestrings. Jochen -- Jochen Topf joc...@remote.org http://www.jochentopf.com/ +49-173-7019282 _______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/dev