On Sun, Aug 30, 2009 at 12:51 PM, John Smith <[email protected]>wrote:
> 2009/8/31 Anthony <[email protected]>: > > > And that's part of what's wrong with it. You still haven't explained how > to > > handle stop signs on bi-directional, one lane road. You haven't > explained > > how to handle lane-changes. You require ways to be split every time the > > number of lanes changes (though I guess any system with "lanes=*" does > > that). You don't explain how to record where lanes can be changed and > where > > they can't. You require adding children to every single bi-directional > road > > in the world that merely has a stop sign. > > I'm still unsure where you get this idea that I think a way needs to > be split, just like a relation joins multiple ways, a way joins > multiple lanes. What happens when the road goes from four lanes to six? Should this be recorded at every intersection which has a turning lane? > > It is a reason to do it. But it's a reason to do it right. > > How would you do it? > Once there was enough demand for it, I'd probably introduce "lane" as a type of "way" and use relations to tie together lanes in places where lane changes are allowed. But I think we're quite a ways off from needing that.
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
