2013/4/9 Martin Atkins <[email protected]> > > Right. It seems like the schematic vs. detail tagging situation is pretty > good for streets if you accept the area:highway proposal: > > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/**wiki/Proposed_features/area:**highway<http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/area:highway> > > Under this proposal you have area:highway as the detail element, and the > existing highway ways as the routing network element, so the two tagging > schemes can easily coexist without trampling one another.
there is also the area-relation proposal which aims at mapping (beside other) implicit highway polygons: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Proposed/Area The idea is that you only map "parallels" to the highway way (at the outer border of the sidewalk and eventually the kerbs) and then connect the two sides via a relation. This way you don't need the traversing ways (usually used to close the polygon on the small sides) which really helps a lot to avoid misconnections of the routing graph and the highway-areas. Until now this type of relation is not supported, but it is not really complicated to do it. To help the renderers I guess that the direction of the two parallel ways should be the same (otherwise you risk to get X-like connections). cheers, Martin
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
