Am 11.06.2018 um 17:19 schrieb osm.tagg...@thorsten.engler.id.au: > > *From:*Bryan Housel <bhou...@gmail.com> > *Sent:* Tuesday, 12 June 2018 01:12 > *To:* osm-tagging <tagging@openstreetmap.org> > *Subject:* Re: [Tagging] I can't support transit:lanes > > > > I’ve already written plenty of code to deal with turn restrictions. > There are lots of rules for splitting and joining things to other > things depending on where the via node is. > > > > If you are curious, here is a recent commit where I tried to improve > iD’s handling of this. > > https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/commit/87841fc4035c7de9e0f58ca50f05f65723ad5226 > > > > In other words if this new relation works like a turn restriction, > it’s already mostly supported… Otherwise expect basic editing (like > splits, joins, connections) to break it. > > > > > > You are seriously telling me that if you have two ways that share a > node, you are unable to figure out what that node is without having it > explicitly listed as a totally redundant member of the relation? > No, we are all quite capable of figuring that out. The issue is having to hardwire semantics for one tag out of 1000s and while there are a lots of special cases, mainly when reversing ways, this would be a first for splitting (and merging likely too).
Simon > > > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
