Re: [talk-au] Splitting Ways for small roundabout traffic islands

On 15/11/21 22:14, Andrew Harvey wrote: Splitting makes the data more complicated than it needs to be, and doesn't add more value or accuracy compared to simply tagging the traffic island as a node. One with a gap for pedestrians gets tagged as crossing:island=yes, without a crossing maybe

Re: [talk-au] Dedicated Indigenous Protected Areas 2020 dataset available for OSM

On 21/11/21 18:10, nwastra nwastra wrote: I am of the opinion that because we are only adding two extra IPAs and the marine parts to the existing IPAs, it is probably not necessary to go through the imports mailing list as we would follow the same procedure as that was used with CAPAD will a

Re: [talk-au] Use of pedestrian streets to imply route hierarchy

Thanks for the replies. It confirms that my original approach was correct and that the other mapper's changes were a bit misguided. I guess I need to get in touch with him to change things back. Richard -- Original Message -- From: "Andrew Harvey" To: "Richard Sota" Cc: "OSM

Re: [talk-au] Use of pedestrian streets to imply route hierarchy

On 21/11/21 2:41 pm, stevea wrote: I repeat something I have said a number of times, say for example, about bicycle infrastructure / routes. Although it can be said about "pedestrian infrastructure / routes" pretty much one-for-one (as bicycle infrastructure / routes). It is this: There