On 1 February 2010 03:34, Anthony <[email protected]> wrote: > Just watched http://www.vimeo.com/5673183 > > Yeah, ultimately we're going to need to use areas with elevation information > and/or full blown polyhedra. Yes, 2D mapping isn't sufficient. But 2D is > closer to 3D than 1D. :)
We're already doing quasi 3D mapping with layers, and implied widths by highway tags, so even at this point we're well beyond simple 1D mapping, but this won't extend to complex situations like the ones presented by those in that video and neither will areas, and I'm fully willing to admit my suggestions probably won't handle really complex situations either I haven't tried to describe their situation in XML yet but will later today, but we need a solution not half solutions that doesn't work when it does complex highways and interchanges. Going with Richards idea, what about making the editor do the grunt work, place a node at a point, and then have the editor calculate the width by stretching the road way side ways, then apply the width values against nodes, which would make areas redundent. If we also define the numbe of lanes on a per node basis we wouldn't need to split ways just because lanes increased or descreased. _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
