On 09/04/2014, Martin Koppenhoefer <[email protected]> wrote: > implicit directions/facings have always been a problem, because of some > mappers not being aware of the conventions (even when written in the wiki), > examples include waterways, steps. At least for steps I am mapping > incline=up for some years, because the default direction was questioned. > When there is a tag things get more obvious and if people don't know their > meaning there is some hope they will look it up.
Why do you think that contributors that didn't check the convention about way direction will check the convention about direction tag ? Neither convention is intuitive during creation. Both conventions require editor support to not unknowingly mess things up when editing. Regarding my earlier "simpler and less ambiguous" comment, consider the following : * there's already disagreement in the tag name. OP expected "azimuth", commenter mentioned "direction". * What's the value ? "N/S/E/W" are ok but imprecise. * A numerical value is a pain to obtain. Some people will forget wether 0 is east or north, others will put in radians. * Tools will support one method but forget the other, and won't be able to do any QA. Using our existing 2D data model to represent 2D data sounds wayyy saner. _______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
