On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 10:58:36PM +0200, Lambert Carsten wrote:
That often leads to inconsistencies, but
inconsistent is not necessarily bad.
Exactly, no need to 'force' junctions to have connecting roads on the same
layer. If you really believe in the 'middle of the junction theory' let
On Thursday 13 August 2009 00:31:23 Lauri Kytömaa wrote:
Lambert Carsten wrote:
sense. Even though the smaller road ends at the edge of the larger road
not the middle of the road.
Inside the crossing area the roads overlap, neither ends there - you're
on both roads. But you're not on the
Hi Jochen,
Could you please comment on this thread:
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2009-July/039217.html
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2009-July/039259.html
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2009-August/039847.html
since you created the 'T-junction'
.
Jochen
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 10:27:17AM +0200, Lambert Carsten wrote:
From: Lambert Carsten lhc@solcon.nl
To: talk@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Layer transitions
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 10:27:17 +0200
Cc: Jochen Topf joc...@remote.org
Hi Jochen,
Could you please comment
On Wednesday 12 August 2009 11:59:36 Jochen Topf wrote:
Hi!
Thanks for your quick input.
I have amended the bridge and tunnel pages with the reason for those rules:
Rendering breaks if you have different layers on junction nodes.
This is tagging for the renderer which I thought was generally
2009/8/12 Jochen Topf joc...@remote.org:
in real life bridges don't start in the *middle* of junctions
so there *is* a little bit of non-bridge roads between the junction and
the bridge.
+1
For canals in Dutch cities, I'd consider not tagging the roads special but
giving the canals a
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 7:04 PM, Martin
Koppenhoeferdieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
2009/8/12 Jochen Topf joc...@remote.org:
in real life bridges don't start in the *middle* of junctions
so there *is* a little bit of non-bridge roads between the junction and
the bridge.
+1
That's a stange
On Wednesday 12 August 2009 20:36:54 Jochen Topf wrote:
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 07:18:03PM +0200, Pieren wrote:
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 7:04 PM, Martin
Koppenhoeferdieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
2009/8/12 Jochen Topf joc...@remote.org:
in real life bridges don't start in the *middle*
Lambert Carsten wrote:
sense. Even though the smaller road ends at the edge of the larger road
not the middle of the road.
Inside the crossing area the roads overlap, neither ends there - you're
on both roads. But you're not on the bridge that starts only several
meters away - or inches away if
2009/8/12 Lambert Carsten lhc@solcon.nl:
There *is* nothing. It is all an abstraction and *this* abstraction is not
helpfull or get us anywhere. As I stated before a crossing between a big road
and a (much) smaller road does not either get little bits of road inserted
in the smaller road
On Saturday 08 August 2009 14:11:21 Marc Schütz wrote:
no, it's not, it's about relative order in the db.
Fair enough. In other words, at any node which is a junction of way
segments with different layers (whether the segments are part of the
same way or different ways), the physical
On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 1:20 AM, Roy Wallace waldo000...@gmail.com wrote:
In other words, at any node which is a junction of way
segments with different layers (whether the segments are part of the
same way or different ways), the physical implication is that the
slope of the way changes in
no, it's not, it's about relative order in the db.
Fair enough. In other words, at any node which is a junction of way
segments with different layers (whether the segments are part of the
same way or different ways), the physical implication is that the
slope of the way changes in the close
On Friday 31 July 2009 17:25:19 Richard Mann wrote:
I saw some strange rendering effects when a side road was straight onto a
bridge. The bridge was layer=1, so the side road was rendered on top of the
main road. That's why all the ways approaching a junction should be on the
same layer. You
On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 9:39 AM, Lambert Carstenlhc@solcon.nl wrote:
In any case, PLEASE let us get rid of this 'rule' that a T-junction has to be
on the same layer.
+1
Pieren
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
On Friday 31 July 2009 17:25:19 Richard Mann wrote:
I saw some strange rendering effects when a side road was straight onto
a
bridge. The bridge was layer=1, so the side road was rendered on top of
the
main road. That's why all the ways approaching a junction should be on
the
same
Keepright appears to think that bridges without a layer tag imply layer=1.
Whereas I'd assumed in my tagging that layer=0 unless stated. Is this to
match what renderers do? I would rather they didn't, because making the
waterways layer=-1 seems to work most of the time, and I'd prefer to avoid
On Friday 07 August 2009 12:29:09 Marc Schütz wrote:
On Friday 31 July 2009 17:25:19 Richard Mann wrote:
I saw some strange rendering effects when a side road was straight onto
a
bridge. The bridge was layer=1, so the side road was rendered on top of
the
main road. That's
2009/8/8 Roy Wallace waldo000...@gmail.com:
Forget about the renderer for a second. IMHO we should tag what is on
the ground. As the wiki says, layer is used to mark if a
way/node/area is above or under another one, where is above or
under clearly refers to the physical reality. It's not
On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 8:51 AM, Martin
Koppenhoeferdieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
2009/8/8 Roy Wallace waldo000...@gmail.com:
Forget about the renderer for a second. IMHO we should tag what is on
the ground. As the wiki says, layer is used to mark if a
way/node/area is above or under another
Hi!
to make my question more precise, please have a look at this tunnel that
crosses a railway track (the railway is a subway that runs at ground level):
http://www.openstreetmap.org/edit?lat=48.1325961lon=16.3109488zoom=19way=29205957
The tunnel tag implies layer=-1 and that leads to a
On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 4:28 PM, Harald Kleinere9625...@gmx.at wrote:
Do you think, this tunnel is OK the way it is or should someone add a
small piece of way on layer 0 at the eastern end next to the T-junction
to avoid a T-junction of different layers?
What is the situation at that
On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 7:28 AM, Harald Kleinere9625...@gmx.at wrote:
Hi!
to make my question more precise, please have a look at this tunnel that
crosses a railway track (the railway is a subway that runs at ground level):
to make my question more precise, please have a look at this tunnel that
crosses a railway track (the railway is a subway that runs at ground
level):
http://www.openstreetmap.org/edit?lat=48.1325961lon=16.3109488zoom=19way=29205957
The tunnel tag implies layer=-1
No, it doesn't.
and
I saw some strange rendering effects when a side road was straight onto a
bridge. The bridge was layer=1, so the side road was rendered on top of the
main road. That's why all the ways approaching a junction should be on the
same layer. You can either achieve this by inserting a short way between
I want to talk about this page on the wiki describing how to map tunnels
correctly:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tunnel#How_to_Map
Especially the last paragraph causes headaches to me:
If the tunnel ends in a junction you'll need a small un-tunneled way
between the end of the
2009/7/30 Marc Schütz schue...@gmx.net:
this might be a logical topic: we are mapping the center of the road.
The tunnel can not end at the center of the crossing road, because
this road itself is not a tunnel. (you will have at least half the
width of the crossing road untunneled).
No, IMO
this might be a logical topic: we are mapping the center of the road.
The tunnel can not end at the center of the crossing road, because
this road itself is not a tunnel. (you will have at least half the
width of the crossing road untunneled).
No, IMO we're mapping the entire road, but
2009/7/30 Marc Schütz schue...@gmx.net:
Maybe not in all cases, but have a look at this example:
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=qsource=s_qhl=degeocode=q=bayreuthsll=37.0625,-95.677068sspn=59.467068,107.138672ie=UTF8ll=49.935936,11.646567spn=0.000375,0.000817t=kz=21
It'd be hard to argue that
2009/7/29 Harald Kleiner e9625...@gmx.at:
Hi!
I want to talk about this page on the wiki describing how to map tunnels
correctly:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tunnel#How_to_Map
Especially the last paragraph causes headaches to me:
If the tunnel ends in a junction you'll need a small
30 matches
Mail list logo
