On 28 April 2015 at 11:05, Colin Smale <colin.sm...@xs4all.nl> wrote:
> The existing through_route proposal may not be perfect but IMHO is a > good base. It will need weeding through to keep it on-topic. > > This is how I see the scope of the discussion (just to get the ball > rolling, feel free to shoot): > > 1) it has to be about junctions, not about individual ways (it's not about > warning of sharp bends in a continuous road) > > 2) it has to be about aspects which cannot (reliably) be derived from the > geometry alone (see point 1 above) > > 3) it must cover factors which affect the way the route to be driven is > explained to the user ("keep left" vs. "take the exit", "follow the road to > the right" vs. "turn right" etc etc) > > 4) it *may* cover factors which affect the way the router chooses its > optimum route (e.g. time penalties for a "give way") > > //colin > > > Is a 'through route' a continuation of - Road number - Road name - The lack of crossing white paint into/out of a 'side road' , or - Direction of travel I'm concerned about ambiguity arising out of potential different interpretations. I'm sure we will be able to find examples of all combinations of all of the above! -- Mike. @millomweb <https://sites.google.com/site/millomweb/index/introduction> - For all your info on Millom and South Copeland via *the area's premier website - * *currently unavailable due to ongoing harassment of me, my family, property & pets* T&Cs <https://sites.google.com/site/pmailkeey/e-mail>
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk