Re: [OSM-talk] Editing road geometry Australia

2019-01-12 Thread Maarten Deen 

On 2019-01-11 23:15, Warin wrote:

On 11/01/19 21:45, Markus wrote:

On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 07:40, Maarten Deen  wrote:

On 2019-01-11 07:16, Petra Rajka - (p) wrote:



   * -35.3409195, 149.1616891

Ways 77001149 and 77000891 should IMHO not be mapped like that but
mapped with turn:lanes.

+1


-1

I disagree. But then I could be wrong.

In the above (Canberra) example:

Where a solid line exists between the two groups of lanes there is a
'legal barrier' that you cannot legally cross between the two groups of
lanes (2 go right and 2 continues


But solid lines (single and double) used in the sense of "not allowed to 
pass" or "not allowed to change lanes" are used everywhere over the 
whole world.
I'm sure you're not suggesting that this [1] road should be mapped as 
two seperate ways? Then why would we map other roads with no physical 
divider as two seperate ways?


[1] 




Also using the tag lanes how can the turn restrictions that exist be
tagged, the right 2 must turn right and the left 2 must go straight on 
?


turn:lanes=right|right|straight|straight

Regards,
Maarten

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Editing road geometry Australia

2019-01-11 Thread Warin 

On 11/01/19 21:45, Markus wrote:

On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 07:40, Maarten Deen  wrote:

On 2019-01-11 07:16, Petra Rajka - (p) wrote:


See below two cases where we would simplify the geometry:

   * -32.0914374, 116.0129206

Is seen no big problem in how the roads are layed out there. Coming from
the motorway there is a clear divider where the offramp connects to the
Albany Highway.

 and
 form a double-rectangle,
but there isn't such a divider. I'd map that place like that:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:ID_Screen_Shot_from_-32.0914374,_116.0129206.png


I have more problems with the tags of the on- and offramp. They are
mapped as motorway when they should be mapped as motorway_link. The two
bridges in the on- and offramp are mapped as motorway_link.

+1. I'd also delete the descriptions like Tonkin Highway Southbound
Ramp off to Albany Highway in the name tag unless the ramps are signed
like that on site.


   * -35.3409195, 149.1616891

Ways 77001149 and 77000891 should IMHO not be mapped like that but
mapped with turn:lanes.

+1


-1

I disagree. But then I could be wrong.

In the above (Canberra) example:

Where a solid line exists between the two groups of lanes there is a
'legal barrier' that you cannot legally cross between the two groups of
lanes (2 go right and 2 continues

 straight on).

Using the tag lanes does not convey this 'legal barrier'.

Also using the tag lanes how can the turn restrictions that exist be
tagged, the right 2 must turn right and the left 2 must go straight on ?

Note: this is also raised on the Australian list too.. so I have said the same 
thing there too.


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Editing road geometry Australia

2019-01-11 Thread Warin 

A left turn there would be legal, unless there is a local sign.
So I would not place a turn restriction on it base on satellite imagery.



On 12/01/19 07:47, Jem wrote:
Spot on. Although the routing engine data could impose a turn 
restriction here based upon geometry as part of their data pipeline.


I wonder if it is legal to turn there and, if not, does that form part 
of the ground truth IRT OSM, regardless of whether there is a sign 
present.



On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 22:53, Marc Gemis > wrote:


If you miss the on-ramp and are waiting for the traffic signals, a
router can recalculate the route in the meantime and still try to let
you turn left at the traffic signals.

m.

On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 1:47 PM Maarten Deen mailto:md...@xs4all.nl>> wrote:
>
> I agree that Markus' solution is more elegant (and I was more
looking to
> the offramp itself). I would normally also map it like that but
I also
> don't go out of my way to correct situations like that.
> The way it is mapped now is more organic, more as you would actually
> drive. As such I don't see it as wrong.
>
> I would not add a turn restriction. For routers it is useless
because
> you never get that route anyway.
>
> Regards,
> Maarten
>
> On 2019-01-11 13:23, Jem wrote:
> >> I'd map that place like that:
> >

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:ID_Screen_Shot_from_-32.0914374,_116.0129206.png
> >
> > I agree. And a supplementary question... would you also add a
> > no-left-turn restriction from https://osm.org/way/581948344 at
> > https://osm.org/node/5680879176? I would, and have done in the
past.
> > But to be honest, I'm not sure if a turn like that (having already
> > passed the slip lane designated for the turn) is legal or not.
> >
> > On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 20:47, Markus
mailto:selfishseaho...@gmail.com>>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 07:40, Maarten Deen mailto:md...@xs4all.nl>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On 2019-01-11 07:16, Petra Rajka - (p) wrote:
> >>>
> 
>  See below two cases where we would simplify the geometry:
> 
>        * -32.0914374, 116.0129206
> >>>
> >>> Is seen no big problem in how the roads are layed out there.
> >> Coming from
> >>> the motorway there is a clear divider where the offramp connects
> >> to the
> >>> Albany Highway.
> >>
> >>  and
> >>  form a
> >> double-rectangle,
> >> but there isn't such a divider. I'd map that place like that:
> >>
> >>
> >

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:ID_Screen_Shot_from_-32.0914374,_116.0129206.png
> >>
> >>> I have more problems with the tags of the on- and offramp. They
> >> are
> >>> mapped as motorway when they should be mapped as motorway_link.
> >> The two
> >>> bridges in the on- and offramp are mapped as motorway_link.
> >>
> >> +1. I'd also delete the descriptions like Tonkin Highway
Southbound
> >> Ramp off to Albany Highway in the name tag unless the ramps are
> >> signed
> >> like that on site.
> >>
>        * -35.3409195, 149.1616891
> >>>
> >>> Ways 77001149 and 77000891 should IMHO not be mapped like
that but
> >>> mapped with turn:lanes.
> >>
> >> +1
> >>
> >> Regards
> >>
> >> Markus



___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Editing road geometry Australia

2019-01-11 Thread Jem 
Spot on. Although the routing engine data could impose a turn restriction
here based upon geometry as part of their data pipeline.

I wonder if it is legal to turn there and, if not, does that form part of
the ground truth IRT OSM, regardless of whether there is a sign present.


On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 22:53, Marc Gemis  wrote:

> If you miss the on-ramp and are waiting for the traffic signals, a
> router can recalculate the route in the meantime and still try to let
> you turn left at the traffic signals.
>
> m.
>
> On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 1:47 PM Maarten Deen  wrote:
> >
> > I agree that Markus' solution is more elegant (and I was more looking to
> > the offramp itself). I would normally also map it like that but I also
> > don't go out of my way to correct situations like that.
> > The way it is mapped now is more organic, more as you would actually
> > drive. As such I don't see it as wrong.
> >
> > I would not add a turn restriction. For routers it is useless because
> > you never get that route anyway.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Maarten
> >
> > On 2019-01-11 13:23, Jem wrote:
> > >> I'd map that place like that:
> > >
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:ID_Screen_Shot_from_-32.0914374,_116.0129206.png
> > >
> > > I agree. And a supplementary question... would you also add a
> > > no-left-turn restriction from https://osm.org/way/581948344 at
> > > https://osm.org/node/5680879176? I would, and have done in the past.
> > > But to be honest, I'm not sure if a turn like that (having already
> > > passed the slip lane designated for the turn) is legal or not.
> > >
> > > On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 20:47, Markus 
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 07:40, Maarten Deen  wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> On 2019-01-11 07:16, Petra Rajka - (p) wrote:
> > >>>
> > 
> >  See below two cases where we would simplify the geometry:
> > 
> >    * -32.0914374, 116.0129206
> > >>>
> > >>> Is seen no big problem in how the roads are layed out there.
> > >> Coming from
> > >>> the motorway there is a clear divider where the offramp connects
> > >> to the
> > >>> Albany Highway.
> > >>
> > >>  and
> > >>  form a
> > >> double-rectangle,
> > >> but there isn't such a divider. I'd map that place like that:
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:ID_Screen_Shot_from_-32.0914374,_116.0129206.png
> > >>
> > >>> I have more problems with the tags of the on- and offramp. They
> > >> are
> > >>> mapped as motorway when they should be mapped as motorway_link.
> > >> The two
> > >>> bridges in the on- and offramp are mapped as motorway_link.
> > >>
> > >> +1. I'd also delete the descriptions like Tonkin Highway Southbound
> > >> Ramp off to Albany Highway in the name tag unless the ramps are
> > >> signed
> > >> like that on site.
> > >>
> >    * -35.3409195, 149.1616891
> > >>>
> > >>> Ways 77001149 and 77000891 should IMHO not be mapped like that but
> > >>> mapped with turn:lanes.
> > >>
> > >> +1
> > >>
> > >> Regards
> > >>
> > >> Markus
> > >>
> > >> ___
> > >> talk mailing list
> > >> talk@openstreetmap.org
> > >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
> > > ___
> > > talk mailing list
> > > talk@openstreetmap.org
> > > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
> >
> > ___
> > talk mailing list
> > talk@openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Editing road geometry Australia

2019-01-11 Thread Petra Rajka - (p) 
On this post you can find an image about how we would edit these cases: 
https://github.com/TelenavMapping/AU-NZ_mapping_projects/issues/5

Regards,
Petra
-Original Message-
From: Marc Gemis  
Sent: Friday, January 11, 2019 2:51 PM
To: Maarten Deen 
Cc:  
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Editing road geometry Australia

If you miss the on-ramp and are waiting for the traffic signals, a router can 
recalculate the route in the meantime and still try to let you turn left at the 
traffic signals.

m.

On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 1:47 PM Maarten Deen  wrote:
>
> I agree that Markus' solution is more elegant (and I was more looking 
> to the offramp itself). I would normally also map it like that but I 
> also don't go out of my way to correct situations like that.
> The way it is mapped now is more organic, more as you would actually 
> drive. As such I don't see it as wrong.
>
> I would not add a turn restriction. For routers it is useless because 
> you never get that route anyway.
>
> Regards,
> Maarten
>
> On 2019-01-11 13:23, Jem wrote:
> >> I'd map that place like that:
> > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:ID_Screen_Shot_from_-32.091
> > 4374,_116.0129206.png
> >
> > I agree. And a supplementary question... would you also add a 
> > no-left-turn restriction from 
> > https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fosm.org%2fway%2f
> > 581948344=E,1,W8BdLprvnr_q3VoE2HKm-GlIytkKYQULG3mOBHiBI8vG2y5JXAoN
> > LEY8-fMtwYvRkBnGK0ch4-IOcbB3wzWup37kJNoeevnkcy6X0VuERw,,=1 at
> > https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fosm.org%2fnode%2f5680879176=E,1,ZxAUpmFrwYlftR9DaOw1l5vhNAXqhinLqXEffS-6crFbK-1zCIBJ5LeOZYHo8m0zosxwukjDFb90XhhDZf5gTIPak1Wh1_nyaqJLJ6dQrUMx7UXqf3d6b8pFnw,,=1
> >  I would, and have done in the past.
> > But to be honest, I'm not sure if a turn like that (having already 
> > passed the slip lane designated for the turn) is legal or not.
> >
> > On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 20:47, Markus 
> > wrote:
> >
> >> On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 07:40, Maarten Deen  wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On 2019-01-11 07:16, Petra Rajka - (p) wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>> See below two cases where we would simplify the geometry:
> >>>>
> >>>>   * -32.0914374, 116.0129206
> >>>
> >>> Is seen no big problem in how the roads are layed out there.
> >> Coming from
> >>> the motorway there is a clear divider where the offramp connects
> >> to the
> >>> Albany Highway.
> >>
> >> <https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/596272469> and 
> >> <https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/596272466> form a 
> >> double-rectangle, but there isn't such a divider. I'd map that 
> >> place like that:
> >>
> >>
> > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:ID_Screen_Shot_from_-32.091
> > 4374,_116.0129206.png
> >>
> >>> I have more problems with the tags of the on- and offramp. They
> >> are
> >>> mapped as motorway when they should be mapped as motorway_link.
> >> The two
> >>> bridges in the on- and offramp are mapped as motorway_link.
> >>
> >> +1. I'd also delete the descriptions like Tonkin Highway Southbound
> >> Ramp off to Albany Highway in the name tag unless the ramps are 
> >> signed like that on site.
> >>
> >>>>   * -35.3409195, 149.1616891
> >>>
> >>> Ways 77001149 and 77000891 should IMHO not be mapped like that but 
> >>> mapped with turn:lanes.
> >>
> >> +1
> >>
> >> Regards
> >>
> >> Markus
> >>
> >> ___
> >> talk mailing list
> >> talk@openstreetmap.org
> >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
> > ___
> > talk mailing list
> > talk@openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Editing road geometry Australia

2019-01-11 Thread Marc Gemis 
If you miss the on-ramp and are waiting for the traffic signals, a
router can recalculate the route in the meantime and still try to let
you turn left at the traffic signals.

m.

On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 1:47 PM Maarten Deen  wrote:
>
> I agree that Markus' solution is more elegant (and I was more looking to
> the offramp itself). I would normally also map it like that but I also
> don't go out of my way to correct situations like that.
> The way it is mapped now is more organic, more as you would actually
> drive. As such I don't see it as wrong.
>
> I would not add a turn restriction. For routers it is useless because
> you never get that route anyway.
>
> Regards,
> Maarten
>
> On 2019-01-11 13:23, Jem wrote:
> >> I'd map that place like that:
> > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:ID_Screen_Shot_from_-32.0914374,_116.0129206.png
> >
> > I agree. And a supplementary question... would you also add a
> > no-left-turn restriction from https://osm.org/way/581948344 at
> > https://osm.org/node/5680879176? I would, and have done in the past.
> > But to be honest, I'm not sure if a turn like that (having already
> > passed the slip lane designated for the turn) is legal or not.
> >
> > On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 20:47, Markus 
> > wrote:
> >
> >> On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 07:40, Maarten Deen  wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On 2019-01-11 07:16, Petra Rajka - (p) wrote:
> >>>
> 
>  See below two cases where we would simplify the geometry:
> 
>    * -32.0914374, 116.0129206
> >>>
> >>> Is seen no big problem in how the roads are layed out there.
> >> Coming from
> >>> the motorway there is a clear divider where the offramp connects
> >> to the
> >>> Albany Highway.
> >>
> >>  and
> >>  form a
> >> double-rectangle,
> >> but there isn't such a divider. I'd map that place like that:
> >>
> >>
> > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:ID_Screen_Shot_from_-32.0914374,_116.0129206.png
> >>
> >>> I have more problems with the tags of the on- and offramp. They
> >> are
> >>> mapped as motorway when they should be mapped as motorway_link.
> >> The two
> >>> bridges in the on- and offramp are mapped as motorway_link.
> >>
> >> +1. I'd also delete the descriptions like Tonkin Highway Southbound
> >> Ramp off to Albany Highway in the name tag unless the ramps are
> >> signed
> >> like that on site.
> >>
>    * -35.3409195, 149.1616891
> >>>
> >>> Ways 77001149 and 77000891 should IMHO not be mapped like that but
> >>> mapped with turn:lanes.
> >>
> >> +1
> >>
> >> Regards
> >>
> >> Markus
> >>
> >> ___
> >> talk mailing list
> >> talk@openstreetmap.org
> >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
> > ___
> > talk mailing list
> > talk@openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Editing road geometry Australia

2019-01-11 Thread Maarten Deen 
I agree that Markus' solution is more elegant (and I was more looking to 
the offramp itself). I would normally also map it like that but I also 
don't go out of my way to correct situations like that.
The way it is mapped now is more organic, more as you would actually 
drive. As such I don't see it as wrong.


I would not add a turn restriction. For routers it is useless because 
you never get that route anyway.


Regards,
Maarten

On 2019-01-11 13:23, Jem wrote:

I'd map that place like that:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:ID_Screen_Shot_from_-32.0914374,_116.0129206.png

I agree. And a supplementary question... would you also add a
no-left-turn restriction from https://osm.org/way/581948344 at
https://osm.org/node/5680879176? I would, and have done in the past.
But to be honest, I'm not sure if a turn like that (having already
passed the slip lane designated for the turn) is legal or not.

On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 20:47, Markus 
wrote:


On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 07:40, Maarten Deen  wrote:


On 2019-01-11 07:16, Petra Rajka - (p) wrote:



See below two cases where we would simplify the geometry:

  * -32.0914374, 116.0129206


Is seen no big problem in how the roads are layed out there.

Coming from

the motorway there is a clear divider where the offramp connects

to the

Albany Highway.


 and
 form a
double-rectangle,
but there isn't such a divider. I'd map that place like that:



https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:ID_Screen_Shot_from_-32.0914374,_116.0129206.png



I have more problems with the tags of the on- and offramp. They

are

mapped as motorway when they should be mapped as motorway_link.

The two

bridges in the on- and offramp are mapped as motorway_link.


+1. I'd also delete the descriptions like Tonkin Highway Southbound
Ramp off to Albany Highway in the name tag unless the ramps are
signed
like that on site.


  * -35.3409195, 149.1616891


Ways 77001149 and 77000891 should IMHO not be mapped like that but
mapped with turn:lanes.


+1

Regards

Markus

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Editing road geometry Australia

2019-01-11 Thread Markus 
On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 13:23, Jem  wrote:
>
> I agree. And a supplementary question... would you also add a no-left-turn 
> restriction from https://osm.org/way/581948344 at 
> https://osm.org/node/5680879176? I would, and have done in the past. But to 
> be honest, I'm not sure if a turn like that (having already passed the slip 
> lane designated for the turn) is legal or not.

I would only add a no-left-turn restriction if there is a sign on site.

A routing app would likely not lead via this node onto the motorway
anyway, since  is the
more direct way.

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Editing road geometry Australia

2019-01-11 Thread Jem 
> I'd map that place like that:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:ID_Screen_Shot_from_-32.0914374,_116.0129206.png

I agree. And a supplementary question... would you also add a
no-left-turn restriction from https://osm.org/way/581948344 at
https://osm.org/node/5680879176? I would, and have done in the past. But to
be honest, I'm not sure if a turn like that (having already passed the slip
lane designated for the turn) is legal or not.

On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 20:47, Markus  wrote:

> On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 07:40, Maarten Deen  wrote:
> >
> > On 2019-01-11 07:16, Petra Rajka - (p) wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > See below two cases where we would simplify the geometry:
> > >
> > >   * -32.0914374, 116.0129206
> >
> > Is seen no big problem in how the roads are layed out there. Coming from
> > the motorway there is a clear divider where the offramp connects to the
> > Albany Highway.
>
>  and
>  form a double-rectangle,
> but there isn't such a divider. I'd map that place like that:
>
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:ID_Screen_Shot_from_-32.0914374,_116.0129206.png
>
> > I have more problems with the tags of the on- and offramp. They are
> > mapped as motorway when they should be mapped as motorway_link. The two
> > bridges in the on- and offramp are mapped as motorway_link.
>
> +1. I'd also delete the descriptions like Tonkin Highway Southbound
> Ramp off to Albany Highway in the name tag unless the ramps are signed
> like that on site.
>
> > >   * -35.3409195, 149.1616891
> >
> > Ways 77001149 and 77000891 should IMHO not be mapped like that but
> > mapped with turn:lanes.
>
> +1
>
> Regards
>
> Markus
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Editing road geometry Australia

2019-01-11 Thread Markus 
On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 07:40, Maarten Deen  wrote:
>
> On 2019-01-11 07:16, Petra Rajka - (p) wrote:
>
> >
> > See below two cases where we would simplify the geometry:
> >
> >   * -32.0914374, 116.0129206
>
> Is seen no big problem in how the roads are layed out there. Coming from
> the motorway there is a clear divider where the offramp connects to the
> Albany Highway.

 and
 form a double-rectangle,
but there isn't such a divider. I'd map that place like that:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:ID_Screen_Shot_from_-32.0914374,_116.0129206.png

> I have more problems with the tags of the on- and offramp. They are
> mapped as motorway when they should be mapped as motorway_link. The two
> bridges in the on- and offramp are mapped as motorway_link.

+1. I'd also delete the descriptions like Tonkin Highway Southbound
Ramp off to Albany Highway in the name tag unless the ramps are signed
like that on site.

> >   * -35.3409195, 149.1616891
>
> Ways 77001149 and 77000891 should IMHO not be mapped like that but
> mapped with turn:lanes.

+1

Regards

Markus

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Editing road geometry Australia

2019-01-10 Thread Maarten Deen 

On 2019-01-11 07:16, Petra Rajka - (p) wrote:


Since January we started to work on road geometry in Canberra, Perth
and Melbourne and we came across some intersections where roads (turn
lanes) are mapped separately even where there is no physical divider
or chevron markings.

See below two cases where we would simplify the geometry:

* -32.0914374, 116.0129206


Is seen no big problem in how the roads are layed out there. Coming from 
the motorway there is a clear divider where the offramp connects to the 
Albany Highway.
I have more problems with the tags of the on- and offramp. They are 
mapped as motorway when they should be mapped as motorway_link. The two 
bridges in the on- and offramp are mapped as motorway_link.



* -35.3409195, 149.1616891


Ways 77001149 and 77000891 should IMHO not be mapped like that but 
mapped with turn:lanes.


Regards,
Maarten

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk