|
Hi all, I'm building a wayfinding app with OSM data. I'm only working with a small subset, the Toronto PATH relation for Toronto's underground walkway/malls. I found that 3 nodes had been created where there should be one, so the ways didn't join up. I simply edited two of the ways in the OSM iD editor, and it automatically deleted the unnecessary nodes. Does it look OK? https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4026125389 https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4026125390 https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4026125391 |
|
Thanks for asking here! :) Your edit looks fine. Thank you for catching and fixing a non-obvious data usability problem that affected routing. Also see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Editing_Standards_and_Conventions#Junctions . (Just in case Hendrik deletes his answer – I am writing another to sum up alester's and my comments) Thank you. A bit annoyed we lost that history of comments on Hendrik's answer, oh well.
(17 Nov '16, 22:39)
Aaron Lawren...
|
off topic: for those curious among us: no, "PATH" is not contrary to Name is the name only, but really the name of this foot path network, see Wikipedia. I guess it just would be debatable (tagging for the renderer) if the name "PATH" really should be on each single way or just on the network relation (where it currently is, too).
Yes, I think its an awkward choice for a name because it's so ambiguous, but it's well settled into their branding now. I think it would be better on the relation only. But I'm not launching into major revisions since the business approach is still being approved.