On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 5:24 AM, Richard Mann <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 3:37 AM, Nathan Edgars II <[email protected]> wrote: >> On the other hand, http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/52557869 >> and http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/52557872, among other >> links south of Elizabeth and West Lawn, should be at most >> primary_link, since the "independent sections" from NJ 4 can only make >> it that far before hitting residential streets. > the second primary (because it's two-way), the third primary_link,
Two-way traffic shouldn't prevent something from being a link. Otherwise this is not a motorway_link: http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=gloucester,+nj&sll=40.867777,-74.10303&sspn=0.0034,0.0103&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Gloucester,+Camden,+New+Jersey&ll=39.807893,-75.290852&spn=0.006907,0.020599&t=k&z=17&layer=c&cbll=39.807842,-75.290767&panoid=F9YbCTAmZtoxZm9tdRS9nw&cbp=12,311.49,,0,2.89 >> But what about http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/11660654, a >> typical U-turn jughandle that has two (mapped) driveway intersections? >> Do the driveways really prevent it from being a link the whole way? > > the fourth could be just about > anything from trunk to service. Mapnik makes a mess if a link > intersects a service, but that's cos Mapnik renders a trunk_link under > a service, which is wrong. The simplest is probably to call the fourth > a trunk with a note that there's a case for it being a trunk_link, but > that trunk is more renderer-proof. That seems incorrect, and hence tagging (incorrectly) for the renderer. Whether something is a link should not depend on how links are rendered. _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
