Andy Allan wrote: > That's the main problem. You are now making a proposal that > distinguishes nodes at the end of a way from non-terminating nodes - > since only those in the middle can inherit a sense of direction from > the way.
True, but not a problem. There's no "rule" about how many nodes in a way, so if you want to do this, you can add another one near the end. This is no different to adding it 5m to the left of the end, it's just that it's now associated with the way in a "relations lite" sort of way (as Hugh described it). > I'm also with frederick on the left/right thing (most bus stops are > 'on the left', as far as I'm concerned - even when they are on > opposite sides of the road) and the other objection with compass > directions is valid for U-shaped roads. We need to decide whether these things are ways or roads. If they are roads, they need to have a thickness and be represented as such. (Then we can tag the two sides differently.) If they are ways, we need to stop thinking of road-related terminology when we talk about their properties. Pick one :-) > The latitude and longitude of point objects should be as accurate as > we can make them, and if they need some form of logical linking with > something then we can logically link them without creating bogus > latlongs :-) What is the lat and long of a parking restriction on one side of a road? Gerv _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
