Re: [Tagging] direction=forward/backward on nodes ?
Hi, Am 13.04.2014 21:35, schrieb Steve Doerr: I'm surprised that so many people are jumping to this conclusion. Let's remember that a way is just a series of nodes in a particular order. So a node is not necessarily an isolated object. Agree In many cases, it exists solely as part of a way. Thus the concept of direction is not meaningless for a node which is part of a way. Agree partly. It's not meaningless, but it get's ambiguous very often. Take traffic signals as one example where the direction might be used: Besides an intersection someone could add the traffic lights on the four individual ways (instead on the intersecting node itself). This matches the installation of the individual lights and the stop positions, but it produces wrong results without a direction tag. The drawback of that is, that someone crossing the intersection straight meets two traffic lights, which is wrong of course. The mapper therefore might decide to add direction-tags to them, as each traffic light node is relevant and applied only for one of the two directions. Looks perfect now - all four traffic lights are mapped separately where they are, routing for cars works great (provided that the direction tag is known and supported by routers). Enter of the next mapper: He want's to add the footways and cycleways that cross the streets using the pedestrian traffic lights integrated in the traffic lights mentioned above. As a result the nodes previously mapped with a direction are shared by two ways, and it's hard to determine what the direction tag refers to, as of course crossing for pedestrians is possible and meaningful for both directions. I haven't examined any uses of the tag on a node, but I can imagine, for instance, that a node in a way with a direction attribute might be used to represent a road-sign that applies only to traffic on the way passing that node in a particular direction. For other traffic signs it's the same, and that's why we usually map the road signs meaning on the road that is affected by it. (The sign itself may be mapped as such, as an obstacle and a physical object next to the street), while maximum speed, maximum dimensions (width, height, weight), oneway access, access restrictions and so on are mapped on the where they hold. Here the direction is useful (look at the oneway=yes tag), meaningful and not ambiguous; on nodes it is or get's very lightly without tagging mistakes. regards Peter ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] direction=forward/backward on nodes ?
Am 14.04.2014 08:28, schrieb Peter Wendorff: Hi, Am 13.04.2014 21:35, schrieb Steve Doerr: I'm surprised that so many people are jumping to this conclusion. Let's remember that a way is just a series of nodes in a particular order. So a node is not necessarily an isolated object. Agree In many cases, it exists solely as part of a way. Thus the concept of direction is not meaningless for a node which is part of a way. Agree partly. It's not meaningless, but it get's ambiguous very often. Exactly, it is not meaningless but ambiguous and can easily lead to wrong results. Take traffic signals as one example where the direction might be used: Besides an intersection someone could add the traffic lights on the four individual ways (instead on the intersecting node itself). This matches the installation of the individual lights and the stop positions, but it produces wrong results without a direction tag. The drawback of that is, that someone crossing the intersection straight meets two traffic lights, which is wrong of course. The mapper therefore might decide to add direction-tags to them, as each traffic light node is relevant and applied only for one of the two directions. Looks perfect now - all four traffic lights are mapped separately where they are, routing for cars works great (provided that the direction tag is known and supported by routers). Enter of the next mapper: He want's to add the footways and cycleways that cross the streets using the pedestrian traffic lights integrated in the traffic lights mentioned above. As a result the nodes previously mapped with a direction are shared by two ways, and it's hard to determine what the direction tag refers to, as of course crossing for pedestrians is possible and meaningful for both directions. Thanks for another example where cardinal coordinates work but forward/backward fails. I haven't examined any uses of the tag on a node, but I can imagine, for instance, that a node in a way with a direction attribute might be used to represent a road-sign that applies only to traffic on the way passing that node in a particular direction. For other traffic signs it's the same, and that's why we usually map the road signs meaning on the road that is affected by it. (The sign itself may be mapped as such, as an obstacle and a physical object next to the street), while maximum speed, maximum dimensions (width, height, weight), oneway access, access restrictions and so on are mapped on the where they hold. Here the direction is useful (look at the oneway=yes tag), meaningful and not ambiguous; on nodes it is or get's very lightly without tagging mistakes. Ok, we can take a split between unconnected nodes on the left-/right-hand-side of the road and nodes being part of a way. The first are less ambigious but you still need to know the driving directions where as the latter ones just won't work properly with forward/backward. To make it less ambigious and easier I would deprecate forward/backward completely for nodes and advice to use cardinal coordinates for all nodes. fly ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] direction=forward/backward on nodes ?
To make it less ambiguous and easier I would deprecate forward/backward completely for nodes and advice to use cardinal coordinates for all nodes. I think that would be ok for traffic_sign:direction=*, but not for traffic_signals:direction=* or direction=* when used with highway=stop/give_way, because it wouldn't be as easy to know to which highway's direction the highway=traffic_signals/stop/giveway applies to. IMHO we should use relations for cases like this (see turn restrictions, via nodes, for reference) +1 2014-04-14 8:44 GMT-03:00 fly lowfligh...@googlemail.com: Am 14.04.2014 08:28, schrieb Peter Wendorff: Hi, Am 13.04.2014 21:35, schrieb Steve Doerr: I'm surprised that so many people are jumping to this conclusion. Let's remember that a way is just a series of nodes in a particular order. So a node is not necessarily an isolated object. Agree In many cases, it exists solely as part of a way. Thus the concept of direction is not meaningless for a node which is part of a way. Agree partly. It's not meaningless, but it get's ambiguous very often. Exactly, it is not meaningless but ambiguous and can easily lead to wrong results. Take traffic signals as one example where the direction might be used: Besides an intersection someone could add the traffic lights on the four individual ways (instead on the intersecting node itself). This matches the installation of the individual lights and the stop positions, but it produces wrong results without a direction tag. The drawback of that is, that someone crossing the intersection straight meets two traffic lights, which is wrong of course. The mapper therefore might decide to add direction-tags to them, as each traffic light node is relevant and applied only for one of the two directions. Looks perfect now - all four traffic lights are mapped separately where they are, routing for cars works great (provided that the direction tag is known and supported by routers). Enter of the next mapper: He want's to add the footways and cycleways that cross the streets using the pedestrian traffic lights integrated in the traffic lights mentioned above. As a result the nodes previously mapped with a direction are shared by two ways, and it's hard to determine what the direction tag refers to, as of course crossing for pedestrians is possible and meaningful for both directions. Thanks for another example where cardinal coordinates work but forward/backward fails. I haven't examined any uses of the tag on a node, but I can imagine, for instance, that a node in a way with a direction attribute might be used to represent a road-sign that applies only to traffic on the way passing that node in a particular direction. For other traffic signs it's the same, and that's why we usually map the road signs meaning on the road that is affected by it. (The sign itself may be mapped as such, as an obstacle and a physical object next to the street), while maximum speed, maximum dimensions (width, height, weight), oneway access, access restrictions and so on are mapped on the where they hold. Here the direction is useful (look at the oneway=yes tag), meaningful and not ambiguous; on nodes it is or get's very lightly without tagging mistakes. Ok, we can take a split between unconnected nodes on the left-/right-hand-side of the road and nodes being part of a way. The first are less ambigious but you still need to know the driving directions where as the latter ones just won't work properly with forward/backward. To make it less ambigious and easier I would deprecate forward/backward completely for nodes and advice to use cardinal coordinates for all nodes. fly ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] direction=forward/backward on nodes ?
On Apr 13, 2014, at 11:28 PM, Peter Wendorff wrote: Agree partly. It's not meaningless, but it get's ambiguous very often. Take traffic signals as one example where the direction might be used: Besides an intersection someone could add the traffic lights on the four individual ways (instead on the intersecting node itself). This matches the installation of the individual lights and the stop positions, but it produces wrong results without a direction tag. The drawback of that is, that someone crossing the intersection straight meets two traffic lights, which is wrong of course. The mapper therefore might decide to add direction-tags to them, as each traffic light node is relevant and applied only for one of the two directions. Looks perfect now - all four traffic lights are mapped separately where they are, routing for cars works great (provided that the direction tag is known and supported by routers). Enter of the next mapper: He want's to add the footways and cycleways that cross the streets using the pedestrian traffic lights integrated in the traffic lights mentioned above. As a result the nodes previously mapped with a direction are shared by two ways, and it's hard to determine what the direction tag refers to, as of course crossing for pedestrians is possible and meaningful for both directions. Hmmm. The examples I've seen on the map and as I recall the traffic_signals portion of the wiki for complex intersections the traffic signal node is not placed where the signal is but rather where a vehicle must stop for the signal. That is prior to the crosswalk. So if a second mapper comes along and adds footways then those footways should not go through the vehicle traffic signal nodes. I haven't seen an example but it seems to me that the pedestrian signal should be on the new footway where a pedestrian should wait. So there should be no confusion as to the meaning of a traffic_signals:direction=forward/backward tag. On Apr 14, 2014, at 4:44 AM, fly wrote: Ok, we can take a split between unconnected nodes on the left-/right-hand-side of the road and nodes being part of a way. The first are less ambigious but you still need to know the driving directions where as the latter ones just won't work properly with forward/backward. To make it less ambigious and easier I would deprecate forward/backward completely for nodes and advice to use cardinal coordinates for all nodes. At least for the case of traffic_signals:direction=forward/backward, the use should be unambiguous as they are currently defined. Cardinal directions could work but I wonder about errors and ambiguity that might crop up in the consumers of this data. I suppose that there might be some very detailed map renderers that wish to show all signals, signs, etc. But I've assumed that this information was primarily intended to make routing more accurate. Forward/backward along the direction of a way is information any routing algorithm has immediately at hand. But what about a road that makes an sharp bend just before the intersection? We sometimes have these here where two roads come in at an angle and the traffic engineers decided to make the intersection as close to a right angle as possible for safety reasons. I can see a human mapper assuming the tangent the road has before and after the intersection as the cardinal direction but routing software might not easily figure that out. Is there anyone following this thread that is doing work that consumes these tags? If so what is easier and less error prone to process? Regarding using relations, given the multitude of human errors introduced into existing relations by people making changes, I'd argue that very good support for traffic signal relations be built into all editors if this is the direction people wish to take. That does not seem to be the case currently for many types of relations, even simple ones like route relations. -Tod smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] direction=forward/backward on nodes ?
On Sat, Apr 12, 2014 at 10:43:58PM +0200, Janko Mihelić wrote: 2014-04-12 20:39 GMT+02:00 John Packer john.pack...@gmail.com: I have never used this key before because of the drawback you mentioned: There is no editor supporting this tag when reverting a way direction, Does anyone else think that the reverse tool should be removed from editors? There's no real use for it, and it only gives us problems when new mappers use it. If someone really needs it, they can download a JOSM plugin. frequently use R on waterways. Richard ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] direction=forward/backward on nodes ?
On Sat, Apr 12, 2014 at 11:57:12PM +0200, Colin Smale wrote: Have to disagree here. There are plenty of real uses for reversing a way, and not everyone uses JOSM. Colin +1 from someone who does use JOSM. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] direction=forward/backward on nodes ?
I have no problems using forward/backward on way but on nodes this does not make sense and in my opinion we need to discourage the usage in favour of cardinal coordinates either as number or as letters (West, South southeast, NWW, S and so on). fly Am 12.04.2014 20:39, schrieb John Packer: I have never used this key before because of the drawback you mentioned: There is no editor supporting this tag when reverting a way direction, but as far as I know, /direction=forward/backward/ is used with /highway=stop/ and /highway=give_way/ and maybe some other signs. There are keys similar to /direction=forward/backward/; they are traffic_sign:forward/backward= http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Traffic_sign#As_part_of_a_wayyes http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Traffic_sign#As_part_of_a_way and traffic_signals:direction=forward/backward https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:traffic_signals:direction 2014-04-12 15:27 GMT-03:00 fly lowfligh...@googlemail.com mailto:lowfligh...@googlemail.com: Please, tell me for what kind of keys is the paragraph about forward/backward useful. There are no examples and it is only about nodes. Thanks fly Am 12.04.2014 20:00, schrieb John Packer: Do note that when used on benches, /forward/ and /backward/ are not valid values (which is what we are talking about). /amenity=bench/ with a /direction=*/ key use angles and cardinal directions as values. 2014-04-12 14:46 GMT-03:00 fly lowfligh...@googlemail.com mailto:lowfligh...@googlemail.com mailto:lowfligh...@googlemail.com mailto:lowfligh...@googlemail.com: Sorry, forgot the link. Yes, it does make sense and is useful for benches and traffic_signals. Am 12.04.2014 19:43, schrieb John F. Eldredge: Since a node is a point, and has no dimensions, a direction tag is meaningless. On April 12, 2014 12:20:26 PM CDT, fly lowfligh...@googlemail.com mailto:lowfligh...@googlemail.com mailto:lowfligh...@googlemail.com mailto:lowfligh...@googlemail.com wrote: Hey As I had much fun with the last subject (noexit), I just can not hold myself back to jump into another bee nest. I read on the wiki page [1], that direction=forward/backward are valid values also for nodes. Could someone please explain me, how this can work. I only find some major reasons not to do that: * You always have to look at the parent object to determine the direction * There is no editor supporting this tag when reverting a way direction * I am not allowed to split a way at this point which is another unneeded burn and once again you need special editor support which is not present. [1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:direction ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] direction=forward/backward on nodes ?
Am 12/apr/2014 um 19:43 schrieb John F. Eldredge j...@jfeldredge.com: Since a node is a point, and has no dimensions, a direction tag is meaningless. +1 cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] direction=forward/backward on nodes ?
Am 13.04.2014 16:25, schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer: Am 12/apr/2014 um 19:43 schrieb John F. Eldredge j...@jfeldredge.com: Since a node is a point, and has no dimensions, a direction tag is meaningless. +1 Martin, throught you wrote something different about benches last week on talk@osm If we proper define the direction, there is not problem with direction=* on nodes. E.g. directions for benches are taken from a sitting position and in general the wiki talks about facing the direction which in my understanding would be the opposite direction of your looking/driving direction. cu fly ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] direction=forward/backward on nodes ?
I'm surprised that so many people are jumping to this conclusion. Let's remember that a way is just a series of nodes in a particular order. So a node is not necessarily an isolated object. In many cases, it exists solely as part of a way. Thus the concept of direction is not meaningless for a node which is part of a way. I haven't examined any uses of the tag on a node, but I can imagine, for instance, that a node in a way with a direction attribute might be used to represent a road-sign that applies only to traffic on the way passing that node in a particular direction. Steve On 12/04/2014 18:43, John F. Eldredge wrote: Since a node is a point, and has no dimensions, a direction tag is meaningless. On April 12, 2014 12:20:26 PM CDT, fly lowfligh...@googlemail.com wrote: Hey As I had much fun with the last subject (noexit), I just can not hold myself back to jump into another bee nest. I read on the wiki page [1], that direction=forward/backward are valid values also for nodes. Could someone please explain me, how this can work. I only find some major reasons not to do that: * You always have to look at the parent object to determine the direction * There is no editor supporting this tag when reverting a way direction * I am not allowed to split a way at this point which is another unneeded burn and once again you need special editor support which is not present. Cheers fly ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] direction=forward/backward on nodes ?
Am 13/apr/2014 um 16:45 schrieb fly lowfligh...@googlemail.com: If we proper define the direction, there is not problem with direction=* on nodes. E.g. directions for benches are taken from a sitting position and in general the wiki talks about facing the direction which in my understanding would be the opposite direction of your looking/driving direction. sorry, my quoting was not easily understandable, I am not generally opposing directions (expressed eg in degrees) but the forward backward values on nodes cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] direction=forward/backward on nodes ?
Am 13/apr/2014 um 21:35 schrieb Steve Doerr doerr.step...@gmail.com: Thus the concept of direction is not meaningless for a node which is part of a way. I haven't examined any uses of the tag on a node, but I can imagine, for instance, that a node in a way with a direction attribute might be used to represent a road-sign that applies only to traffic on the way passing that node in a particular direction. IMHO we should use relations for cases like this (see turn restrictions, via nodes, for reference) cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] direction=forward/backward on nodes ?
Since a node is a point, and has no dimensions, a direction tag is meaningless. On April 12, 2014 12:20:26 PM CDT, fly lowfligh...@googlemail.com wrote: Hey As I had much fun with the last subject (noexit), I just can not hold myself back to jump into another bee nest. I read on the wiki page [1], that direction=forward/backward are valid values also for nodes. Could someone please explain me, how this can work. I only find some major reasons not to do that: * You always have to look at the parent object to determine the direction * There is no editor supporting this tag when reverting a way direction * I am not allowed to split a way at this point which is another unneeded burn and once again you need special editor support which is not present. Cheers fly ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging -- John F. Eldredge -- j...@jfeldredge.com Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] direction=forward/backward on nodes ?
Sorry, forgot the link. Yes, it does make sense and is useful for benches and traffic_signals. Am 12.04.2014 19:43, schrieb John F. Eldredge: Since a node is a point, and has no dimensions, a direction tag is meaningless. On April 12, 2014 12:20:26 PM CDT, fly lowfligh...@googlemail.com wrote: Hey As I had much fun with the last subject (noexit), I just can not hold myself back to jump into another bee nest. I read on the wiki page [1], that direction=forward/backward are valid values also for nodes. Could someone please explain me, how this can work. I only find some major reasons not to do that: * You always have to look at the parent object to determine the direction * There is no editor supporting this tag when reverting a way direction * I am not allowed to split a way at this point which is another unneeded burn and once again you need special editor support which is not present. [1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:direction ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] direction=forward/backward on nodes ?
Do note that when used on benches, *forward* and *backward* are not valid values (which is what we are talking about). *amenity=bench* with a *direction=** key use angles and cardinal directions as values. 2014-04-12 14:46 GMT-03:00 fly lowfligh...@googlemail.com: Sorry, forgot the link. Yes, it does make sense and is useful for benches and traffic_signals. Am 12.04.2014 19:43, schrieb John F. Eldredge: Since a node is a point, and has no dimensions, a direction tag is meaningless. On April 12, 2014 12:20:26 PM CDT, fly lowfligh...@googlemail.com wrote: Hey As I had much fun with the last subject (noexit), I just can not hold myself back to jump into another bee nest. I read on the wiki page [1], that direction=forward/backward are valid values also for nodes. Could someone please explain me, how this can work. I only find some major reasons not to do that: * You always have to look at the parent object to determine the direction * There is no editor supporting this tag when reverting a way direction * I am not allowed to split a way at this point which is another unneeded burn and once again you need special editor support which is not present. [1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:direction ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] direction=forward/backward on nodes ?
I have never used this key before because of the drawback you mentioned: There is no editor supporting this tag when reverting a way direction, but as far as I know, *direction=forward/backward* is used with *highway=stop* and *highway=give_way* and maybe some other signs. There are keys similar to *direction=forward/backward*; they aretraffic_sign:forward/backward=http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Traffic_sign#As_part_of_a_way yes http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Traffic_sign#As_part_of_a_way and traffic_signals:direction=forward/backwardhttps://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:traffic_signals:direction 2014-04-12 15:27 GMT-03:00 fly lowfligh...@googlemail.com: Please, tell me for what kind of keys is the paragraph about forward/backward useful. There are no examples and it is only about nodes. Thanks fly Am 12.04.2014 20:00, schrieb John Packer: Do note that when used on benches, /forward/ and /backward/ are not valid values (which is what we are talking about). /amenity=bench/ with a /direction=*/ key use angles and cardinal directions as values. 2014-04-12 14:46 GMT-03:00 fly lowfligh...@googlemail.com mailto:lowfligh...@googlemail.com: Sorry, forgot the link. Yes, it does make sense and is useful for benches and traffic_signals. Am 12.04.2014 19:43, schrieb John F. Eldredge: Since a node is a point, and has no dimensions, a direction tag is meaningless. On April 12, 2014 12:20:26 PM CDT, fly lowfligh...@googlemail.com mailto:lowfligh...@googlemail.com wrote: Hey As I had much fun with the last subject (noexit), I just can not hold myself back to jump into another bee nest. I read on the wiki page [1], that direction=forward/backward are valid values also for nodes. Could someone please explain me, how this can work. I only find some major reasons not to do that: * You always have to look at the parent object to determine the direction * There is no editor supporting this tag when reverting a way direction * I am not allowed to split a way at this point which is another unneeded burn and once again you need special editor support which is not present. [1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:direction ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] direction=forward/backward on nodes ?
2014-04-12 20:39 GMT+02:00 John Packer john.pack...@gmail.com: I have never used this key before because of the drawback you mentioned: There is no editor supporting this tag when reverting a way direction, Does anyone else think that the reverse tool should be removed from editors? There's no real use for it, and it only gives us problems when new mappers use it. If someone really needs it, they can download a JOSM plugin. Janko ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] direction=forward/backward on nodes ?
Have to disagree here. There are plenty of real uses for reversing a way, and not everyone uses JOSM. Colin On 2014-04-12 22:43, Janko Mihelić wrote: 2014-04-12 20:39 GMT+02:00 John Packer john.pack...@gmail.com: I have never used this key before because of the drawback you mentioned: There is no editor supporting this tag when reverting a way direction, Does anyone else think that the reverse tool should be removed from editors? There's no real use for it, and it only gives us problems when new mappers use it. If someone really needs it, they can download a JOSM plugin. Janko ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging [1] Links: -- [1] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] direction=forward/backward on nodes ?
On 4/12/14 5:57 PM, Colin Smale wrote: Have to disagree here. There are plenty of real uses for reversing a way, and not everyone uses JOSM. Colin On 2014-04-12 22:43, Janko Mihelić wrote: Does anyone else think that the reverse tool should be removed from editors? There's no real use for it, and it only gives us problems when new mappers use it. If someone really needs it, they can download a JOSM plugin. i agree as well. i use the reverse tool, well, not all the time, but frequently enough that i think it definitely belongs in the editors. richard -- rwe...@averillpark.net Averill Park Networking - GIS IT Consulting OpenStreetMap - PostgreSQL - Linux Java - Web Applications - Search signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
