Anthony wrote: > On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 10:04 AM, Anthony <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 9:39 AM, Dave F. <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > With the tools available to us at the moment attaining > reality is a lot of work For instance the majority of mappers > don't draw > an area for, lets say, an 1800mm wide pavement/sidewalk, they > would use > a linear way to represent it. > > > Personally I'd say that's because the way doesn't represent the > sidewalk, it represents a path of travel which happens to coincide > with a sidewalk. But I think I'm in the minority there. > > > By the way, so long as the linear way has a width tagged, it can be > treated as an area subject to certain constraints (must be constant > "width"). Which is what I said in the second part of my post. The abutting render would not be attached to the edge of that width render but the centreline of it. > > Most sidewalks pretty much meet that criterion, and roads sort of meet > it (not at intersections, though).
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
