On 3/4/10 11:54 AM, Alan Mintz wrote: > At 2010-03-03 14:31, Richard Welty wrote: > >On 3/3/10 4:29 PM, Paul Johnson wrote: > >> Alan Mintz wrote: > >> > >>> A similar problem exists with some landuse=* ways that > >>> people have glued to roads. > >>> > >> I'd call that a bit of an error: Clearly that landuse doesn't > >> continue all the way out to the street centerline. > >> > >but for people using josm w/the validator who are not aware of the issue, > >they are told that the duplicate nodes are an error, and there's a > >convenient > >fix button right there. > > Sounds like the validator should take into account the type of features in > this case, right? I'm all for joining nodes of like feature types (like > landuse to landuse), but it shouldn't tell you (let you?) join landuse to > highway. > i would agree with you. not being familiar with internals in this case, i don't know how hard that would be to adjust. however, at a minimum, there probably ought to be some sort of documentation/help option available for errors and warnings so a newish user can get immediate feedback on whether a fix is advisable, maybe right click/help-with-error leading to a text help dialog? > From a technical standpoint, the land parcels do indeed usually extend out > to the centerline of the roadway, but an easement is granted to the > city/county/state for the road, utilities, etc., and the area within the > easement may not be built upon by the landowner. IMO, that should exclude > the area within the easement from the landuse boundary. > > and from a practical point of view, this is how they are in the database at the present time; nodes for landuse/areas are at the same locations as nodes in highways.
richard _______________________________________________ josm-dev mailing list josm-dev@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/josm-dev
