--- On Fri, 12/12/08, Ian Sergeant <[email protected]> wrote:
> From: Ian Sergeant <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: [talk-au] What gives with roundabouts?
> To: [email protected]
> Cc: [email protected]
> Received: Friday, 12 December, 2008, 9:10 AM
> [email protected] wrote:
>
> > I completely agree with all of Darrin's points.
>
> Fair 'nuff.
>
> > I'm a big fan of "mapping what's on the ground" and "don't tag for
> > the renderers/routers".
>
> As is everyone - but we can't forget that a linear road is always going
> to be a representation of a 2 dimension road surface, and currently that
> is what we have to work with in OSM. If you were drawing the full road
> width in OSM, the road wouldn't actually deviate at all for a
> mini-roundabout, it would just be drawn within the width of the road.
> Mapping a 4-node deviation in the road for a mini-roundabout isn't
> actually what is on the ground, either. The question remains, how to
> best represent what is on the ground.
True about abstract linear vs 2D. I think of it as we draw the centre line
of a lane (or lanes), and that lane will deviate around a roundabout, as
opposed to a mini. Maybe the fact that there is a centre island is the
best test. Has anyone ever seen a proper mini in Australia?
> > I plan on submitting a proposal for the roundabout tag, where you
> > can add it to a node like a mini_roundabout, for use in simple
> > suburban type roundabouts. Something like junction:
> > inner_width=3mcould specify the island size, making it possible for
> > pretty rendering. Weird intersecting ways or large roundabouts would
> > have to continue as is.
>
> Oddly enough, these seems almost completely contrary to what Darrin is
> arguing, and aligns well with that I would like to see happen. I really
> don't care whether the tag is called mini_roundabout or something else, I
> think the junction is best represented by a single node.
> Darrin believes that it is better represented by have a loop.
>
> Ian.
Not wanting to put words in Darrin's mouth, but I think we are on the same
page. I'm arguing that it is a conceptual mismatch, we are redefining what
a mini is just for Australia. That makes it hard on all users of worldwide
data. If one of the current features don't match our reality, then it's
our job to propose a new tag, and assist with coding renderers/routers if
it's important to us for it to show up on maps etc.
In some ways, the state/federal governmental definition of types of
roundabout junctions is irrelevant, I think it's more important to match
whatever has been decided by the OSM community. Of course if it doesn't
match our needs, then propose a new tag.
BlueMM (opinions are my own)
Start your day with Yahoo!7 and win a Sony Bravia TV. Enter now
http://au.docs.yahoo.com/homepageset/?p1=other&p2=au&p3=tagline
_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
