On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 8:35 AM, Frederik Ramm <frede...@remote.org> wrote: > Roy Wallace wrote: >> In that case, use a relation. Two options: >> 1) http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Proposed/Segmented_Tag >> 2) http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Proposed/Collected_Ways > > Both don't go far enough in my opinion. This is not a question of "how can I > express that two ways actually belong together", but the more general > question of "how can I model hints about the way in which the physical > junction presents itself to the driver".
I disagree. As Matt said, it is a question of "how to define continuations of roads at junctions". Providing "hints...to the driver", I think, is a job for routing software. > For example you might have a junction that, in the OSM node/way > representation, looks like a sideways "T" (i.e. it looks as if you can go > straight on if you come from the South), and in reality it is Y shaped where > if you come from the South you can either go half-left or half-right but > never straight on. In this example, does the road continue without interruption on the left or right? If so, it can be modeled in the same way as Matt's original example. If not, shouldn't it just be modeled with 3 separate ways ending at the junction, as usual? Maybe I misunderstood the example - could you perhaps draw a picture? > This, too, is a situation where you would want to model > extra routing hints, and many others are possible. I don't think we should be storing "routing hints" in the OSM database. _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
