This mailing list has been migrated to Mailman 3. This archive will no longer be updated. Messages after 1 February 2020 are missing. Please use the new archive instead.
Diese Mailingliste wurde auf Mailman 3 umgestellt. Dieses Archiv wird nicht mehr länger aktualisiert. Nachrichten nach dem 1. Februar 2020 fehlen. Bitte benutze das neue Archiv.
Hi Roland, Am 20.09.2016 um 21:57 schrieb Roland Hieber: > Yes, that is what I tagged in the past and it's also my favourite > because it's suited best for routing purposes as well as collision > detection (in conjunction with track gauge). Especially because for > roads we also tag the centerline, so there is the principle of least > surprise, and algorithms can be reused for railways. > > I currently cannot think of any opposing arguments, maybe because I'm > used to thinking of infrastructure in a topological way. At a simple crossing of two roads (no traffic islands, no turn lanes) you do not map the lines which are described by a car turning to the right/left. You just map the two roads and their intersection. I agree that collision detection is a purpose which has to be kept in mind but I hope that the requirements of collision detection can be fulfilled by adding the radius of the diverging track (assuming that the curve is no clothoid). Except some exotic points, there are only a few different point radii in use in Germany. Best regards Michael -- Per E-Mail kommuniziere ich bevorzugt GPG-verschlüsselt. (Mailinglisten ausgenommen) I prefer GPG encryption of emails. (does not apply on mailing lists) -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: <http://lists.openrailwaymap.org/archives/openrailwaymap/attachments/20160920/83e66c29/attachment.sig>