Re: [talk-au] secondary_link

2008-03-09 Thread Liz
On Sun, 9 Mar 2008, Stuart Robinson wrote:
 Links are by default oneway, I think that's what the other person is
 getting at.

 stuart.

so the use of secondary_link was possibly a shorthand to avoid oneway=true  ??


___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-au


Re: [talk-au] secondary_link

2008-03-08 Thread Stuart Robinson
Links are by default oneway, I think that's what the other person is getting
at.

stuart.

On Sun, Mar 9, 2008 at 5:57 PM, Jack Burton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 Hello all.

 A few days ago, I noticed a fair number of small ways in Adelaide's
 suburbs tagged as highway=secondary_link.

 There's no reference to secondary_link in Map Features, Australian Roads
 Tagging, or in any proposed feature on the wiki.

 So I assumed this was just an error, and changed them to
 highway=secondary so that all renderers would display them properly.

 Last night I noticed that a lot of them had been changed back to
 highway=secondary_link and about half of those were tagged additionally
 with note='LEAVE IT A secondary_link OR ENTER ALL THE OTHER DETAILS'.

 So I searched a little deeper in the wiki and found only two references
 anywhere to highway=secondary_link, both in German and both suggesting
 that secondary_link was not a valid value for the highway tag (at least
 I think that's what they were suggesting -- my German is a little
 rusty).

 I'd like to change these back to highway=secondary again (as I have done
 already for those not tagged with the note), but first want to make sure
 I'm not doing the wrong thing, so thought I'd ask the list.

 The alternative suggestion in the note (enter all the other details)
 doesn't seem to make much sense for these ways. The ways in question are
 all short two node links between the sides of dual-carriageway roads
 where right turns to/from lesser (i.e. tertiary, residential,
 unclassified or service) roads are allowed. It doesn't seem to make
 sense for these very short ways to have names or refs, and things like
 maxspeed would seem to be moot on such short ways. Tags like is_in or
 postal_code wouldn't make sense either, since there are no addresses on
 any of these ways. So I'm not sure what was meant by all the other
 details.

 Can anyone shed some light on the most appropriate tags for these ways?

 Cheers,


 Jack.


 ___
 Talk-au mailing list
 Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
 http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-au




-- 
Version: 3.1
GCS dpu s: a18 C++ UL++ P+ L(+++) E--- W+++ N-- o+ K? w+++(---) O M-- V?
PS+ PE+++ Y? PGP-- t+ 5? X? R-- tv-- b++(+) DI D+ G e* h! r !y+
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-au


Re: [talk-au] secondary_link

2008-03-08 Thread Jack Burton
On Sun, 2008-03-09 at 18:37 +1100, Stuart Robinson wrote:
 Links are by default oneway, I think that's what the other person is
 getting at.

Ah, I didn't realise that. I don't think most of the ways in question
should be oneway, i.e. they allow both turning right from the (dual
carriageway) secondary road onto the (single carriageway) tertiary road
and vice-versa, but I could well be wrong on that -- I'll go and check
out a few of them on the ground before changing anything. Thanks for the
tip.

Cheers,


Jack.


___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-au