Not a fan. It greatly complicates things for information that can either be gleaned obviously or is a "nice to have." Having 3+ relations for something that isn't fully divided just complicates things, with the exception edge case of a relation that starts or ends on a divided highway.
On Sun, Nov 17, 2013 at 9:30 AM, James Mast <[email protected]>wrote: > I'm just curious, but what's everybody's opinion on this? I know it's > acceptable for the Interstates (some are setup this way, some aren't) since > they are all divided, but what about for US Highways and State Highways? I > know that we want to eventually have the cardinal directions in OSM for the > routers so they can properly tell people which direction the of the highway > they need to turn onto (like turn left onto Westbound US-30). > > So, how do we do this and also how do we let people know that aren't part > of talk-us about any possible change so that relations don't get broken > after they've been converted into separate directions? I mean, we can turn > the current state relations for a highway into a "super" relation for each > state once we create a new relation for each direction. Also how are we > going to name each relation? Something like this: > > US 48 (WV - eastbound) > US 48 (WV - westbound) > US 48 (WV - super) > > Plus we can't forget to add in the "direction=*" tag in the relations as > well as the "role" area (or should we just use "forward" there or even tag > nothing there, and leave the direction in the tag area) as we can't expect > the routers to get the direction info from the "name" tag. > > So for detecting relations that get broken after they've been converted > (we should do all the Interstates first, then US highways, and then State > highways), we need a way to let dedicated mappers know when they've been > broken (aka, a "gap") so they can be fixed quickly. An idea of having a > something automatically annalizing the relations whenever they are > modified, kinda like the "OSM Relation Analyzer" [1], would work best IMO. > Except with this analyzer, it produces a RSS feed that will let people > subscribed to it know that there is a broken relation that needs to be > repaired. And once it's been fixed, it will send out a new post on the > feed saying that the relation no longer has a gap so people who see the > feed later know it's been already fixed and don't waste their time checking > to see if it has been fixed. And the feeds would be separate based on the > network type. One for all Interstates (this would include the Business > Interstates), one for US Highways (including the bannered US highways), and > one for each of the 50 state highway networks. That way, you can then just > subscribe to the RSS feeds that you'd want to pay attention to only instead > of being flooded with updates from every highway system in one feed. > > If you guys want, later today, I could do a test US highway in this > setup. I would recommend US-48 in WV/VA as it's one of the shorter US > Highways out there, plus it mostly a divided highway in WV as it's been > built that way and I think it's completely un-divided in VA. > > Also, on a side note, do you guys think we should remove the "symbol" tags > in the relations from all the Interstates/US highways they show up in at > the same time? > > So, let's get this discussion going! > > -James (rickmastfan67) > > [1] - http://ra.osmsurround.org/analyzeRelation?relationId=455420 > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-us mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us > >
_______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
