2013/3/14 Steve Doerr <doerr.step...@gmail.com> > I suppose the main downside is that it requires a relation. I've not > mapped give-way relationships myself, but it would be good to map them, and > the node method seems simpler and would involve less database bloat than > adding a relation at, basically, every junction. I would think the node > method would be sufficient for most junctions, while the relation method > could be available for any more complex cases. As far as I can see, with > the node method, the important thing to remember is that the give-way node > needs to be closer to the intersection node to which it applies than to any > other intersection node on the way, which doesn't seem too difficult to > achieve. It should perhaps be made clear in the wiki that there is not > necessarily an actual Give Way sign: it can be used to represent a give-way > line as well. >
I see your point, and I've tagged a few highway=give_way and highway=stop nodes myself. However, since we are already mapping turn restrictions as relations, I think it wouldn't be so absurd to map give-way's and stops that way too. Granted, there are much more stops than the turn restrictions that need to be described explicitly. I think the two ways may coexist: the node method being easier on the mappers, and the relation being easier on the consumers. Regards, Simone
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
