I would appreciate somebody indicates what are the conventions/standards to materialize a street which is not a simple consecutive sequence of nodes?
An example can be found at
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=50.78575&lon=4.51505&zoom=17&layers=B000FTF
The “Baron Opsomerdreef” street is made of a main in-line way but the small perpendicular ways are also part of the same street.
So far, I “named” all ways with the same “Baron Opsomerdreef” name AND I added all ways in a single “type=route” relation.
Looking at the documentation it seems to be correct although documentation seems to suggest this is done for big routes (such as motorways, etc…)
In my area, I see many situation like this which could prevent searching for a precise address in the map -
Suggestions for a newbie are welcome -
regards,
Pierre Hubaut
If the ways all have the same name, and are all connected to each other, then it should be obvious that they are all part of the same street.
There’s no need to use a relation for this.
This shouldn’t affect searching for addresses.
Right, the relation is unnecessary. Where exactly did you read that this would be appropriate for your situation?
The first part of what you did is what is usually done. The major road is one way, and all the side roads with the same name are just named the same as the main road. No magic required, nor used.
Thanks to both of you Vclaw & Ldp
@Ldp: I got it from various source - this one (below) is the most officil one:
the initial “Relation:Route” http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:route
page (and related discussion e.g. grouping ways of a hiway)
then the specifc page on “Relations”
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation
…
Proposed uses of Relations
Composition and Sectioning of Ways and Tags
…
/Proposed/Segmented Tag is used if a tag or a set of tags shall be applied to a part (segment) of a way
…
and obviously the proposal for collected ways
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Proposed/Collected_Ways
It sounded natural for me to have a more formal way to group these ways than just relying on the name attribute.
Note: i did not apply the conventions in the proposal for collected ways (last page) which I had not read at that time.
P.S.: By the way, I did not get any e-Mail informing me you answered my question - do I have to do a specific setup for this? I am suscribing to the topic, my e-Mail address is the correct one. As this is off topic, can you answer through private Form-eMail to this? thanks
regards,
Route relations are not used to group a forking road. They’re used to describe a route, as the name implies. A road that has some same-named side roads isn’t a route.
The segmented and collected ways proposals are just that: proposals. I don’t know where they’re seeing any real usage now, but I sure know that many tools don’t consider them.
The name attribute should be enough to group roads, especially when they’re linked to each other.