On 4/10/2012 8:39 AM, Peter Dobratz wrote:
On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 10:17 AM, Martijn van Exel<[email protected]> wrote:
On 4/10/2012 7:46 AM, Peter Dobratz wrote:
I'm experimenting with the Java code from Traveling Salesman
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Traveling_salesman
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/158307363
Is this how people generally map these things?
No, I ususally tag the end node highway=turning_circle. There are so many of
them littered around US suburbia that mapping each and every one of them as
a circular way would make for a lot of not too useful data, not to mention a
lot of work.
So we have 2 people in favor of discarding the circular portion of the
Way and just using a node with highway=turning_circle. I actually
also use this approach on roads such as this:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/157338683
I distinguish between having a solid paved surface and a traffic
island. This seems to make sense based on the recommendations for
dual carriage ways (presence of physical separation causing separate
Ways).
According to the wiki:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dturning_circle:
"There is no central island/reservation to a turning circle—it's
simply a wider bit of road."
Are you saying that you delete these circular portions of ways and
replace with a node?
Peter
Yes, I disagree with the strict definition (it is probably UK-biased).
To me, a turning_circle is any dead end that has some form of design
element that facilitates easy turning, whether there's an island or not.
--
Martijn van Exel
_______________________________________________
Talk-us mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
