Don't know if this can happen in the Australian model, but there may be multiple "visitor entrances" which are true alternatives (i.e. not one main plus one side entrance). I would hope the routing would pick the most appropriate entrance, given an ultimate destination in the middle somewhere and not force everyone to use one entrance, irrespective of their arrival route.
//colin On 2015-05-27 11:59, Warin wrote: > On 27/05/2015 7:33 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > 2015-05-27 11:03 GMT+02:00 Ross <i...@4x4falcon.com>: > But if you tagged it on the 1,000,000 hectare property and it was then > displayed at the centroid you'd never find the access to the property as it's > centroid is not even close to the road where the address is. > > Yes, but more intelligent software could see that it is a huge object with > this address and ask where exactly you want to go. Huge objects like this > tend to have several entrances, obviously a centroid will not work well. > Also, a software could recognize automatically which entrances are inside or > on the perimeter of a given (area) address. All this will not work with just > a node. Using that logic the address should be on a node at the main visitor entry ... only visitors will need that level of detail .. regulars will make their own way once in close proximity. _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging [1] Links: ------ [1] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
