On Wed, 6 Jun 2012, Martin Vonwald wrote: > So I'm still not sure, that it is a good idea to use anything than a > node for mini-roundabout. Why isn't it sufficient to use a node and > simply add a tag (if really necessary) to specify the dimension?
For small ones, node seems just fine. However, for those few larger minis it would be nice to be able to satisfy two goal: - Represent the actual roundabout looking largish shape a small car driver will encounter when driving into one identically to a normal roundabout with obstacle (or nearly identically). ...And give proper roundabout driving guidance too. - Somehow indicate the mini_roundabout connectivities for large vehicle case. Both single node and physical way approaches require some preprocessing in small car or large vehicle case. It seems a tradeoff on which use case the preprocessing burden is placed. ...I think that the extra burden that the single node approach puts for the small car preprocessing is not justified, considering how easily the large vehicle preprocessing can be realized if there would be circular ways with either traversible tag or mini_roundabout area connected to it. I repeat, I'm talking about a _large_ mini_roundabout here, not some 2m one people seem to talk in the other mails of this thread which has "larger" in the subject :-). -- i. _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
