Hi,
I'm not completely sure if you mean that the mentioned roundabout
mapping is wrong, but as I was the one who did the last edit, I can
explain how I think regarding roundabouts and relations:
* I use to split up roundabouts if not the complete roundabout belongs
to the relation.
* If the way is oneway (or roundabout, which implies oneway), I do not
add forward or backward as roles.
/Erik
2010-08-29 14:02, Hanno Hecker skrev:
On Fri, 27 Aug 2010 19:30:50 +0200
Peter Kindström<peter2...@infolagret.se> wrote:
Här tror jag t.ex. min statussida (kommentarerna) plus kanske en
markering på OpenStreetBugs eller en FIXME vore realistiskt idag. För
"kreti& pleti" kanske min sida kan vara tillräckligt enkel?
(En baktanke jag har är att skriva en artikel i Caravanbladet och be en
stor del av Sveriges campare om hjälp - de vill ha enkelhet i så fall.)
Vad tycker ni?
I've hacked gary68's relation check ([1], [2]) a bit. It does not
report an error if a junction=roundabout is in the route... note: this
just includes support for closed roundabouts: For example the
roundabout north of node 310316 is divided into four parts, none of the
links has a forward/backward role for Riksväg 55 (two problems at
once :-)).
The result can be seen here:
http://ankh-morp.org/osm/sv-routes.htm (output restricted to
route=road, because route=* would be 4MB :-))
Hanno
[1]:
http://svn.openstreetmap.org/applications/utils/gary68/checkrelation.pl
[2]: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation_Check
_______________________________________________
Talk-se mailing list
Talk-se@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-se
_______________________________________________
Talk-se mailing list
Talk-se@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-se
