You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
My current work pattern is to add surface tagging and fix alignment of roads, then work on sidewalks. Occasionally I will miss a roadway surface tag and it (obviously) won't get picked up on the crossing node. Maybe it's better as a validator step but it could be nice to have surface tags from roadways proactively applied to crossings.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
This is a harder problem to solve.
Yes, I could do that (and it might make sense for crossings without a surface tag), but I would not want to copy a conflicting surface tag over.
Realistically, I can justify copying the surface tag from a highway to the crossing on crossing creation -- the user is more likely to fix the surface data at that time.
Copying the surface tag from the highway to the crossing after the fact is a bit harder to justify. I'd rather have the user look at each crossing individually, instead of mass editing crossings.
I'd rather have no information than wrong information, and I think it is substantially more likely for that to happen when copying surface data from a highway to a crossing when adding the surface to a highway.
In other words, a validator rule would be more appropriate.
EDIT: Removing surface tagging when changing a highway surface might be appropriate though.
My current work pattern is to add surface tagging and fix alignment of roads, then work on sidewalks. Occasionally I will miss a roadway surface tag and it (obviously) won't get picked up on the crossing node. Maybe it's better as a validator step but it could be nice to have surface tags from roadways proactively applied to crossings.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: