-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 821
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
roads-fill railway ordering (affects ways with both railway and aeroway tag) #942
Comments
Is this something that needs solving? I can imagine that ways with both a railway and an aeroway tag are nearly always bad tagging. |
Gisborne Airport has just runway/railway crossing but even this is considered as unique. |
Well, this is inconsistent with formation of a feature column elsewhere, where we do check that the take is one of a subset of values. As an example, see, landcover, which has
(Query simplified) I see a few rewrites to the query to simplify the SQL that can at the same time fix this problem. |
While the rail line is closed now, there used to be a railway/runway crossing in Australia too. Uncommon, yes. Bad tagging, no. |
roads-fill no longer has aeroways |
The
roads-fill
layer has the following SQL for getting railways(roads portion omitted)
The problematic SQL is
ON COALESCE(('railway_' || planet_osm_line.railway), ('aeroway_' || planet_osm_line.aeroway)) = ordertable.feature
For a way with
railway=foo
aeroway=runway
it wil compute the join as joiningCOALESCE('railway_foo','aeroway_runway')
, which evaluates torailway_foo
, which doesn't match, hence preventing the runway from rendering.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: