Could someone add direction on the proper syntax for overlapping ways. For example, if a river is also an international boundary (border) should the two ways be merged (overlap) so that it is a single way? I have been looking for some rules to follow but this point seems vague. -- Jonathan
Disconnecting Overlapping Ways
I have connected two ways (see Overlapping Ways above) and now I realize that part of the section which is overlapped needs to be disconnected. I am having trouble doing this. If I click the scissors the overlapping ways do not separate. But the next option disconnects the lines/ areas from each other. It would be a very tedious task to disconnect all the nodes, separate the two ways, then reconnect all the nodes again. Can anyone give some advice on this? Thanks -- Jonathan
- I found a solution through trial and error. Overlapping ways show the note as a 'grey' dot, while a single way node is a white dot. Click on a gray dot to get the context menu. Click a second time if necessary and choose the opposite pointing arrows 'Disconnect these lines/areas from each other.' The node should turn white, indicating that they are no longer overlapping. Select the node and drag it to reveal the node underneath. Note - if you have to ways intersecting at the node you are about to disconnect, select the node of the line you wish to move first, then select the overlapping node. This way when you disconnect the node and move it, you will move the way you previously selected.
What about ways that loop back and end on one of their prior nodes? Typically, a private driveway service road and loop without directionality? These could be sliced into two, the stalk and the closed-way for the loop. That's simpler geometry but double the number of ways. It seems none of the current validators pick up on this case. The JOSM editor will happily split and combine between either form. Should these be described? Semi-closed way? Are they acceptable? --Pink Duck (talk) 13:19, 24 April 2017 (UTC)