The history of ways doesn't track addition or removal of relations. Maybe somebody was not too bright and did improper merges, or remover the relation from its elements?

Actually, I really don,t like how Place Desjardins was done: it's not a landuse, it's an entire single friggin' building! The way I understand it, it's mapped as if there were four towers within a area of separate commercial building! What I was meaning is that the Orsainvile facility is full of nooks and crannies, and needs, like 6+ multipolygons for good rendering.

Far as I can tell, amenity=prison<"code> doesn't render anyway, so I'll probably have to trace a landuse or building at some point anyway.

I came to a decision that it was simpler to list very close-by stops as a single one instead of a pair of forward/backward stops. The major exception is whenever there is a traffic_signal tag on the intersection. For some reason, it will eliminate the bus_stop tag.

FWIW, of COURSE I would not use that system for intersections like those on Pierre-Bertrand! There are even U-turn lanes (not shown, I think they should be highway=service, not secondary_link)! A major difference is that it frequent for such signals to actually be independent from each others. Which is NOT the case in the intersections on, e.g. Hochelaga.

I haven't found a map on the STM site that shows the stops. And I would be really surprised if someone could build a copyvio case from what is basically reproducing bus routes in OSM...

I actually just found another intersection done with my method, and not by me Although the ways OBVIOUSLY don't cross (WTF? The way they are organized no sane person would analyse as the two parallel ways crossing!) they clearly do share a node at the intersection by the very criterion we use to decide whether two separate ways are appropriate: there is no grade separation at the intersection, ergo the parallel ways share a node at the intersection.

Maaaaan. Those are all my posts. I don't know whether to be amused or disturbed.

Technically, the lanes DO cross as all vehicles in all direction move through the same space. Marking up to 4 independent traffic signals borders on insanity (why would we even want to mark four independent traffic poles?). I suspect there is no fully satisfactory method of drawing those. And I have an even more complicated case not far from home where two street that do not face intersect a double carriage at a single intersection, which neither solution is able to deal with meaningfully IMHO (here).

Well, at first I wanted to mark the buildings, but that would belie the facilities real area. Also, way complicated to trace XD

Ah, okay.

Sorry, I didn't think of doing it at the time, and we have discussed this privately before.

Oh no, trust me, it's definitely NOT street grade. The difference is very obvious on the ground. It also explains why the cycle goes through Gonthier instead of directly connecting to George-V: as far as the layout goes, Bellerive does not connect to George-V.

The N-D lane is no problem (besides my stupid merge). Are you sure you aren't talking about the connection going through Hector-Saint-Victor and Gonthier? I also checked that, and although there IS stuff painted on the asphalt on Gonthier and Saint-Victor, it is NOT a cycle lane, and the other signalisation is exactly what is identified here as a "designated roadway".

I might be crazy, but this does look like spam.

I know about that page. If I didn't, my additions would not show up to begin with (it's that scheme that's implemented AFAIK). The only thing I'm really not clear is how to use the associatedstreet relationship (documentation of relations on the wiki for mappers is very, very badly done IMHO)

As far as I am concerned, of course I map for the renderer. Without a renderer, the data is useless! What use is text that you can't read because you don't have a program that can? What use is a CD without a CD drive?

However, I also map for me, and if something I'm adding causes more display problems than anything else (here by not being very legible and simultaneously risking obscuring other features, an issue I already run into everywhere with labels overlapping icons), then I won't leave it in.

Thanks. I'm not too good at programming, but this seems easy enough (I think, anyway....).

Well, the idea is that areas are bordered by the streets, so in the end it's simpler to attach the nodes to the surrounding ways from the start so as not to leave any unneeded and rather (IMHO) unaesthetic "whitespace" (the "middle" thing is a strawman: streets, unlike ways, are drawn as having actual width). I agree it's not all that intuitive (and I'm used to cleaning stuff anyway. I used to do that all the time on Wikipedia :p), but I also agree it makes for better-looking maps.

By that logic, we would have streets that have no width. I'm fine with the philosophical reasoning for it. I'm just annoyed that I've run afoul of this issue with my keyboard.

Yes, that is what I was thinking, and as I say above, I figured (far as I can tell) how to handle it in Potlatch, which is more use-friendly for me given I don't have access to a GPS apparatus (Montreal is, fortunately, well-pictured).

I think I've gotten 'round it in the end. You have to hover over the way you want to attach to until its node become blue. I'll see later how best to do intersections.