Yes, if you missed the right-turn, you are not allowed to turn right later.

As I see, you added the right turn restriction to all 4 points in 
intersection?
You added turning instruction to this lane: 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/923073526 to extend the turn lanes. Am I 
right?

Sorry for such basic questions, but it's hard topic for me.

I checked this changes on OsmAnd (maps from 1st april) and the data 
itself.  Looks logical for me.

Thank for you contribution!
I think that we can close this topic.

niedziela, 28 marca 2021 o 13:53:31 UTC+2 [email protected] napisał(a):

> What I meant was that the left turn doesn't get made (at least in node-way 
> routing logic) until you get to the southern, eastbound carriageway of 
> Mikolowska so the lanes and turn lanes needed to extend to there. As it 
> was, they got to the northbound carriageway (where there was no right turn 
> restriction) and the bit that joins the two carriageways, so software 
> evaulating it without making reference to relative angles would assume turn 
> signal left was for the left-most road (straight on) and turn signal 
> straight on was for the next road (right). 
>
> I have made the following changes:
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/101869474
> Add a right turn restriction and queried whether the same should be done 
> at the other three nodes (I think it should).
> Split Katowicka https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/410957614 at the 
> southern point of the intersection and extended the third lane and turn 
> lanes into this. 
> Made the same split and tagging changes to Mikolowska's southern 
> carriageway (the other two sections of the intersection were already like 
> this).
>
> [image: image.png]
>
> Can you confirm that the turn restriction seems appropriate - it would be 
> illegal to make the right turn once you got to the crossroads if you had 
> missed the right-turn sliproad?
>
>
> On Sun, 28 Mar 2021 at 11:28, [email protected] <[email protected]> 
> wrote:
>
>>
>> I changed the tagging. Here is the change 
>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/342107973.
>> As far As I am aware, in Poland those signs must be the same. 
>>
>> I will return back to the second issue after I get newest changes from 
>> maps.
>>
>> What do you mean: "It needs to extend all the way to the turn"
>>
>> Thanks for your involvement.
>>
>> niedziela, 21 marca 2021 o 00:47:51 UTC+1 [email protected] 
>> napisał(a):
>>
>>> 2nd issue. Basically I don't know, but until the data makes sense we 
>>> can't expect osmand to make sense of it, so it seems like the first thing 
>>> to try. I'm not sure I've been clear enough that I think the main issue is 
>>> that the tagging isn't correctly placed. It needs to extend all the way to 
>>> the turn. At the moment, I think it would be reasonable for osmand to 
>>> assume straight on is 'left' and right is 'straight on' because the tagging 
>>> doesn't get to the left turn. So evaluating the available roads at the 
>>> point where the turn should be might match up like I've suggested. 
>>>
>>> First issue: To be honest, based on your (contemporary?) photo of the 
>>> traffic light and the aerial imagery it seems reasonable to change the 
>>> tagging and double check for inconsistency later (I'm not sure what would 
>>> be appropriate if the traffic lights said one thing and paint another - 
>>> might need to know Polish road rules but might be best to go with the 
>>> 'right' answer / ask on osm forums).
>>>
>>> Hope that helps
>>>
>>> Tom
>>>
>>> On Sat, 20 Mar 2021, 13:30 [email protected], <[email protected]> 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Sorry for late response.
>>>>
>>>> First issue:
>>>> I found that imagery from: Geoportal 2: high resolution confirms that 
>>>> the most left lane allows to only turn left. I don't know how old is the 
>>>> imagery from Geoportal 2, so to be sure I will take photo of this 
>>>> intersection and fix it.
>>>> I attached the screenshot from Geoportal from osm web editor.
>>>>
>>>> Second issue:
>>>> Tom, you assume that fixing the first issue probably will fix the 
>>>> second issue? 
>>>> Ok, I will check it after fixing the first problem.
>>>>
>>>> Next week I will get photos of this intersection and provide them to be 
>>>> 100% sure that there is a bug in Osm data.
>>>>
>>>> The Geoportal 2 imaginery is available in web editor of osm.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> niedziela, 7 lutego 2021 o 14:50:51 UTC+1 [email protected] 
>>>> napisał(a):
>>>>
>>>>> I agree Xavier. In this case the photo has a left arrow traffic light 
>>>>> in the left hand lane.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sat, 6 Feb 2021, 21:39 'Xavier' via OsmAnd, <
>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Somehow the photo is no longer attached to the messages I have.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But only a left arrow on the left lane would say that the current 
>>>>>> "through;left" is possibly incorrect and the suggested change to 
>>>>>> simply 
>>>>>> "left" is correct per the markings on the ground.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In any case, the correct tagging in OSM is that which will correctly 
>>>>>> represent what is actually marked on the intersection (in combination 
>>>>>> with what those marks mean in Poland).  If the tagging is correct per 
>>>>>> the markings, and OSMAnd still gives bad directions, then the issue 
>>>>>> becomes one for the OSMAnd devs to investigate.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sat, Feb 06, 2021 at 07:05:56PM +0000, Tom Crocker wrote:
>>>>>> >Xavier, a photo of the traffic lights was provided showing a left 
>>>>>> arrow and
>>>>>> >two straight on arrows, and it's okay to use traffic lights, the only
>>>>>> >questions would be whether there are additional lane markings to 
>>>>>> justify
>>>>>> >tagging before the traffic lights, and the meaning of those traffic 
>>>>>> lights
>>>>>> >in Poland.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >On Sat, 6 Feb 2021, 18:25 'Xavier' via OsmAnd, <
>>>>>> [email protected]>
>>>>>> >wrote:
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >> On Sat, Feb 06, 2021 at 09:45:23AM -0800, [email protected] 
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>> >> >Hello,
>>>>>> >> >I noticed that this way: 
>>>>>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/342107973 has
>>>>>> >> >such property
>>>>>> >> >```
>>>>>> >> >turn:lanes=through;left|through|through
>>>>>> >> >```
>>>>>> >> >It looks like an outdated information in maps according to photo 
>>>>>> provided
>>>>>> >> >by me.
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> None of the available satelitte imagery in JOSM is clear enough 
>>>>>> for me
>>>>>> >> to offer advice on what /should/ likely be marked there.
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> The OpenStreetMap Wiki page that defines the contents of the 
>>>>>> turn:lanes
>>>>>> >> key is here: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:turn:lanes
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> You may wish to refer to the definitions as you decide what you 
>>>>>> believe
>>>>>> >> should be correct.  Do note that OpenStreetMap has a *strict* rule 
>>>>>> of
>>>>>> >> "do not map for the renderer" (which also in large part applies to 
>>>>>> "the
>>>>>> >> router" as well).
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> I.e., OpenStreetMap (OSM) desires their map data to accurately 
>>>>>> reflect the
>>>>>> >> *on the ground* condition of the road in that intersection.  If a 
>>>>>> map
>>>>>> >> renderer, or a route router, produces incorrect data, but the 
>>>>>> master
>>>>>> >> map data is correct per OSM's definitions, then OSM considers that 
>>>>>> a
>>>>>> >> bug in the render or routing engine, not a data problem for OSM.
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> For the above key (turn:lanes=through;left|through|through) the
>>>>>> >> "through;left" tag says that the left most lane (looking in the
>>>>>> >> direction in which the OSM way points) is labeled with a lane 
>>>>>> marking
>>>>>> >> arrow that shows both "straight through" travel, and "left turn"
>>>>>> >> travel.  I.e., this image from the OSM Wiki page I reference above:
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> 
>>>>>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/images/thumb/9/95/Turn-left-through.png/50px-Turn-left-through.png
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> >So OsmAnd provided correct micro instruction.
>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>> >> >So the correct property should be:
>>>>>> >> >```
>>>>>> >> >turn:lanes=left|through|through
>>>>>> >> >```
>>>>>> >> >If somebody confirm it I will fix it.
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> This OSM data will indicate that the left most lane is marked with 
>>>>>> an
>>>>>> >> arrow of a left turn only (no straight through travel) I.e., an 
>>>>>> arrow
>>>>>> >> of this type from the OSM Wiki page:
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> 
>>>>>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/images/thumb/4/4a/Richtungspfeil_Links.jpg/50px-Richtungspfeil_Links.jpg
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> The correct choice for OSM depends upon how the lane is 
>>>>>> marked/signed
>>>>>> >> on the ground in this intersection.  As none of the satellite 
>>>>>> images
>>>>>> >> in JOSM are good enough for me to see any lane markings, I cannot
>>>>>> >> suggesst anything based on the satellite images.
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> If you travel through this intersection, then the next time 
>>>>>> through,
>>>>>> >> make note of how the lanes are marked, and then verify the OSM 
>>>>>> tagging,
>>>>>> >> using the Wiki page as a reference, correctly represents the 
>>>>>> markings
>>>>>> >> on the ground (i.e., painted on the lanes or signed on signage).
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> If OSM's tags differ from the signage -- then correcting OSM to 
>>>>>> match
>>>>>> >> the current on the ground signage is proper.
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> However, if OSM's tags match exactly the signage -- then modifying
>>>>>> >> OSM's tags would be a violation of OSM's rules.
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>> >> >This way https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/246174080 has such 
>>>>>> property:
>>>>>> >> >```
>>>>>> >> >turn:lanes=left|through|through;right
>>>>>> >> >```
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> through;right means a sign/painted arrow of this form:
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> 
>>>>>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/images/thumb/d/d4/Turn-through-right.png/50px-Turn-through-right.png
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> And whether that is correct is again not something I can offer an
>>>>>> >> opinion on given the low quality of the JOSM satellite images in 
>>>>>> this
>>>>>> >> area.
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> --
>>>>>> >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 
>>>>>> Groups
>>>>>> >> "OsmAnd" group.
>>>>>> >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, 
>>>>>> send an
>>>>>> >> email to [email protected].
>>>>>> >> To view this discussion on the web visit
>>>>>> >> 
>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/osmand/20210206182545.GQ2001%40d820.dp100.com
>>>>>> >> .
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >-- 
>>>>>> >You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 
>>>>>> Groups "OsmAnd" group.
>>>>>> >To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, 
>>>>>> send an email to [email protected].
>>>>>> >To view this discussion on the web visit 
>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/osmand/CAHmUbmd5DyS2_4m5BZFheqnHeyd9J4GLushf76V37BRXEO94uw%40mail.gmail.com
>>>>>> .
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -- 
>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 
>>>>>> Groups "OsmAnd" group.
>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, 
>>>>>> send an email to [email protected].
>>>>>>
>>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit 
>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/osmand/20210206213908.GR2001%40d820.dp100.com
>>>>>> .
>>>>>>
>>>>> -- 
>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 
>>>> Groups "OsmAnd" group.
>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send 
>>>> an email to [email protected].
>>>>
>>> To view this discussion on the web visit 
>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/osmand/f4f48e38-36d3-4b82-8f18-66b5905ec340n%40googlegroups.com
>>>>  
>>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/osmand/f4f48e38-36d3-4b82-8f18-66b5905ec340n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>>>> .
>>>>
>>> -- 
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
>> "OsmAnd" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
>> email to [email protected].
>>
> To view this discussion on the web visit 
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/osmand/6131acd2-4053-4b27-aff5-803da601af2fn%40googlegroups.com
>>  
>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/osmand/6131acd2-4053-4b27-aff5-803da601af2fn%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>> .
>>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"OsmAnd" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/osmand/84b6613a-e7e6-4ee8-a706-05418691cb50n%40googlegroups.com.

Reply via email to