User talk:Kumakyoo/Fahrrad3

Hi Kumakyoo and/or Fahrrad3,

I'll reply to your Userpage converstaion on here, cause I'm not to shore if you want comments on your user page.

Some good points, I do especially agree with the 2nd and 3rd to last. There is already a josm patch for making ways parrellell.

Recently subsidaries was proposed here, to in part make it possible to add things that are built around the road. This proposal in no way goes far enough to cover what you have said about though really (e.g. pavement widths). I curently just add cycleways as there own ways at the moment, but this isn't perfect just because a renderer may render roads very wide, and the cycleway could disappear beneath, rather than render on the edge of the raod, whereever it appears. On the other hand, I think any highway should be allowed its own road, just as 2 nearby roads, if rendered very wide could blend, but that doesn't mean the data should be merged or moved around.

I think its more inportant to keep the adding of data simple enough that people arn't put off, than going for 100% effiecency. If both can happen then great, but otherwise, I think allowing the flow of productivety is most inportant. Ben 23:19, 6 May 2007 (BST)

It's perfectly well to answer here. (And Fahrrad3 is just german for Bicycle3, because I wanted to name my subpages somehow and did't think long about it.)

I didn't think about your last point, because I'm someone who is quite fast willing to get into complicated datastructures, but I know that other people aren't like this. For the time being I agree, that it is much better to have just a road without cyclelanes next to it, than having nothing at all, because people do not understand what they should do. Maybe an iterative tutorial might help here - I think of something like: 1st step: enter new roads (if people do not want to go in deeper they might stop here) 2nd step enter attributes of that road (again they might stop here), 3rd step enter cycleways etc. and so on. I know, this might still cause problems, when they have to connect one of the new streets to a fully developed steet with cyclelanes, lay-bys and so...

And thanks for the link to the subsidiaries. I still don't see how this helps to connect the subsidary data to the road (a renderer might need this information), but as a rule of thumb one can assume, that subsidiaries belong to the next available road, which might be enough.

• The tag would be attached to the highway wich it applies to. Its not a complete suggestion; rather a discussion, because there are a lot of things that could be put under that key, its just a matter of desiding what is a subsidiary, and what is an independent feature, so maybe you should add your concerns in there. Ben 15:06, 7 May 2007 (BST)

Discussion on talk-de

Hi, recently a discussion started on this topic on the german discussion list: http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-de/2008-May/010296.html Oscarknapp 16:44, 7 May 2008 (UTC)