>From what I have seen, I think the mapping styles in OSM vary even by state, e.g. in Sydney most things are mapped correctly however in other places they are more commonly mapped before physical division starts; I'm almost certain that this would be because of the different contributors in each region, with different ideas on how things should be mapped (even if contrary to the wiki)
On Wed, 9 Mar 2022, 08:59 Dian Ågesson, <m...@diacritic.xyz> wrote: > Thanks Luke, > > I appreciate your comments. I have been slowly working towards > "de-spaghetti-fying" these intersections, but there are just so much! This > user seems to get his way through attrition - he's been around for 10 years > doing these changes. When I eventually give up, like many others in the > past have, I'm sure he will slowly begin changing it back to how he likes > it. > > I was questioning my sanity; there are so many I can't have been the only > person to notice. > > Dian > > On 2022-03-04 17:44, Luke Stewart wrote: > > Hi, > > The standard rule and the way that I map is to only begin a new way if > there is some form a physical separation, so extra turning ways which can > be completed with a box but are modelled as curves aren't following this > rule (same goes for ways that start when lanes start rather than branching > off where the physical separation begins). > > Whilst there are arguments like "it looks better" or "helps with > routing/direction finding/navigation", these are not reasons to break osm, > rather to improve software. > > As for how to resolve with this user, probably affirming a regional > consensus would be most convincing. > > Cheers, > Luke > > On Fri, 4 Mar 2022, 16:33 Dian Ågesson, <m...@diacritic.xyz> wrote: > > Hello, > > I'd like some assistance resolving a disagreement I'm involved with > regarding the correct mapping of dual carriageways at intersections. I have > previously mentioned this topic on the mailing list here: > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/2021-September/014968.html > <https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/2021-September/014968.html,> > . > > To summarise briefly, a very active contributor prefers to model dual > carriageway intersections in a manner that I don't believe is correct. > > Turn lanes are split from main carriageways at the start of the new turn > lane, then cross over each other in an "X" shape, rather than a Box shape > that I've seen documented. (Examples, because I am bad at explaining: Burwood > Hwy/Mountain Hwy <https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/8917929878>, Smith > St/Dandenong Rd <https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2951838115/history>, > Burwood > Hwy/Dorset Rd <https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/8925914559/history>, Princes > Hwy/William Rd <https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/779286918/history>) > Additional highways are introduced for left hand turns where there is no > physical separation (eg, Mt Dandenong Tourist Rd/Mountain Highway > <https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/113685299/history>, Greville St > N/Sturt St <https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/976666655/history>, Glenleith > St/Church St <https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/75040109/history>). This > editor has been an extremely active contributor for many, many years: I > found these examples by just zooming in on a given town or suburb, found > intersection that was modelled this way, and checked the history to confirm > the source. > > I initially engaged with the user in September (111051481 > <https://openstreetmap.org/changeset/111051481>), and after some initial > delay, we have engaged in a productive conversation > <https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=206929&commented> > since. To the user's credit, they have been patient and understanding in > our interactions, and have made adjustments to their mapping style based on > my feedback. Unfortunately, we have reached a fundamental point of > disagreement <https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/118038711>, and I > don't believe further changeset discussions are going to be productive. > > I'm now a little too close to this discussion to be objective, and I would > really appreciate some assistance with this disagreement. Due to the > extraordinary output of this user, simply avoiding editing in similar areas > isn't going to be practical. But am I incorrect in my assessment of > intersection modelling? Is this a question of style, or of accuracy? > > Kind Regards, > Dian. > _______________________________________________ > Talk-au mailing list > Talk-au@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au > >
_______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
