noname=yes should only be used for actual roads which you'd reasonably expect might have a name but don't have a name. I wouldn't want to see it added to every roundabout, it's just a lot of noise. I've seen quite a few roads with noname=yes which actually did have signposted names...
On Mon, 6 Apr 2020 at 18:24, Andrew Davidson <[email protected]> wrote: > Vice versa it is also not necessary to split a roundabout to make it a > member of a relation. Like a lot of things there is no consensus on which > approach is correct: > > > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:route#Bus_routes_and_roundabouts > > and any number of arguments on the tagging mail list. Rather than > demanding that people map your way it may be more productive to modify your > software to handle both schools of mapping. > route relations I can understand, personally I'd just leave off the roundabout from the relation, easy enough to infer the route in between, but how would that work for a destination_sign? I guess the roundabout is always oneway so adding the whole roundabout should usually be okay, but does feel better to have a distinct from way leading to the intersection.
_______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
