Just a heads up, I'm noticing the relation for USBR 66 in Oklahoma is darn > near unmaintainable due to the sheer size of it, and I'm taking action now > to prevent the problem from getting far worse in the future. > > The fact that the west end of the relation ends on a dual carriageway > leading into Texas makes this relation extremely difficult to validate as a > single relation. This relation is presently over 1400 ways and is growing > thanks to lane tagging efforts in the region. As this relation has a huge > number of dual and single carriageway segments, it's going to be easiest to > split this into two relations by direction so at least editors can properly > validate this relation. >
Thanks for bringing this up. I have just ridden most of the proposed USBR66 from East to West and noticed that a non-negligible part of the route is on one-way roads. I fully agree that the best solution is to have two relations, one for each direction. I have come to the same conclusion here in Italy where the problem is less the dual-carriageway issue, but the increasing number of roundabouts or inner-city one-way systems which have the same effect on bicycle routes. I think it's only natural to do it this way. We already do it regularly for bus routes. Volker Padova, Italy
_______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
