On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 5:30 PM, David Paleino <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Monday 22 February 2010 23:26:52, John Smith wrote: > > On 23 February 2010 08:05, David Paleino <[email protected]> wrote: > > > I remember someone complaining with me that routers not supporting > > > highway=* + area=yes in the same relation with a "normal" highway=*, > > > might get confused -- and that something like "landuse=road" would be > > > better. > > > > Wouldn't landuse=road bleed colour between the way and the area? > > If you noted the link I included in my mail, I haven't used it. > > I think landuse=road is semantically more correct than highway=* + area=yes > (but this could be debatable too), but the drawback is that renderers have > the > burden of colouring landuse=road the same way of its way. If both are in a > relation, it could probably be done, but I believe it'd take some effort. > Why does the landuse have to be the same color as the way? I'm pretty sure I'd prefer it to be a different color by default. As for semantical correctness, I think that depends on the road. For roads without any lines, where people are allowed to drive as they please subject to a standard rule like "keep right except to pass", I'd say the area is more semantically correct. In most standard cases, though, where a road is lined, simply mapping it as an area is inadequate. In any case, I'd say landuse=highway would be better than landuse=road, and that should represent the entire right of way. If you want *=road, amenity=road or man_made=road would be more appropriate.
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
