On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 7:00 AM, Bryce Nesbitt bry...@obviously.com wrote:
In the USA occasional sections of even Interstate highways are open to
bicycles,
where no equivalent route exists. There's some argument to tag these as
bike paths to avoid the tag soup of lanes,
and ensure the
On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 7:21 AM, fly lowfligh...@googlemail.com wrote:
Am 06.02.2015 um 14:00 schrieb Bryce Nesbitt:
In the USA occasional sections of even Interstate highways are open to
bicycles,
where no equivalent route exists. There's some argument to tag these as
bike paths to avoid
2015-02-02 18:06 GMT+01:00 Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org:
parking:lane=emergency seems like a good value.
emergency stops are typically not considered parking. I don't think its a
good idea to use something with parking for emergency lanes tagging.
cheers,
Martin
2015-02-02 16:03 GMT+01:00 AYTOUN RALPH ralph.ayt...@ntlworld.com:
The highway=motorway already implies that there is two or more lanes plus
an emergency hard shoulder
no, highway=motorway implies that it is a motorway. These can also have
just one lane (exceptional case) and do not need to
Wikipedia seems to be incomplete on this; I'm presently unaware of any
state that has a statewide prohibition.
On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 7:22 AM, John F. Eldredge j...@jfeldredge.com
wrote:
On February 9, 2015 4:32:36 AM CST, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org
wrote:
On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 7:00
On February 9, 2015 4:32:36 AM CST, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote:
On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 7:00 AM, Bryce Nesbitt bry...@obviously.com
wrote:
In the USA occasional sections of even Interstate highways are open
to
bicycles,
where no equivalent route exists. There's some argument
In the USA occasional sections of even Interstate highways are open to
bicycles,
where no equivalent route exists. There's some argument to tag these as
bike paths to avoid the tag soup of lanes,
and ensure the (unusual) situation is perfectly clear.
___
Am 06.02.2015 um 14:00 schrieb Bryce Nesbitt:
In the USA occasional sections of even Interstate highways are open to
bicycles,
where no equivalent route exists. There's some argument to tag these as
bike paths to avoid the tag soup of lanes,
and ensure the (unusual) situation is perfectly
On 2/3/15 6:14 AM, Colin Smale wrote:
Same as for normal vehicles, but ignoring the access tag and any
restrictions
but you've declared that access=no applies both to obstructed
routes (bollards, guardrails, etc) and unobstructed routes.
richard
--
rwe...@averillpark.net
Averill Park
Am 03.02.2015 um 13:23 schrieb Richard Welty:
On 2/3/15 6:14 AM, Colin Smale wrote:
Same as for normal vehicles, but ignoring the access tag and any
restrictions
but you've declared that access=no applies both to obstructed
routes (bollards, guardrails, etc) and unobstructed routes.
In my
Hi!
2015-02-02 18:06 GMT+01:00 Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org:
On Feb 2, 2015 8:47 AM, Martin Vonwald imagic@gmail.com wrote:
Yes - and what tag would that be for emergency stopping only? I think
that is my main question. Do we have one for that?
parking:lane=emergency seems like a
Surely there is never a law against breaking down. When your car dies,
it dies. If the intention is to persuade people to try to get their
dying vehicle as far as possible to the right (left in the UK), well, we
don't need to tag for that because it is standard. If the intention is
to go
Same as for normal vehicles, but ignoring the access tag and any
restrictions given by hgv, psv, bus, motor_vehicle etc according to what
type of emergency vehicle you are routing for. A police motorcycle is
not the same as a 10-wheel fire truck or a huge mobile crane on the
direction of the
That's an easy one: shoulder=yes. Access=breakdown or access=emergency
wouldn't answer your question unambiguously either. Are you concerned
about the name (which lane is called the shoulder?) or the function
(which lane should I dump the car in if it breaks down? or can I use
this lane if my
2015-02-03 12:18 GMT+01:00 Colin Smale colin.sm...@xs4all.nl:
That's an easy one: shoulder=yes.
Can you please explain to me, how this answers the question WHERE the
shoulder is? It does NOT have to be the leftmost or rightmost lane.
___
Tagging
A shoulder lane in the middle of the carriageway? Maybe you can
illustrate your scenario.
Under normal circumstances (one way per carriageway)
shoulder=left/right/both should cover it.
Or am I misunderstanding what you mean by shoulder?
On 2015-02-03 12:23, Martin Vonwald wrote:
Yesterday I had the following case on a dual carriageway - lanes from left
to right:
* two regular lanes
* one shoulder
* one bicycle lane
Sometimes the shoulder changes to a turning lane and back to a shoulder
after a junction. There is no physical separation whatsoever of all those
four lanes.
OK so it is a kind of buffer to keep the motorised traffic out of the
way of the bikes. Are there any circumstances under which any kind of
vehicle is permitted to be in that lane (while it is not a turn lane)?
That sounds too complex for highway=primary (or whatever) and
cycleway=lane.
I don't understand that comment... I am not declaring anything - at
worst I am making an incorrect assumption to catalyse a bit of a debate
(which seems to be working)...
How do we show the difference between legal and physical restrictions?
Looking at the wiki page for the access tag, its
Am 03.02.2015 um 10:34 schrieb Martin Vonwald:
Fine. But how do you specify where this lane is or if there is a lane at
all?
In the lanes:-tagging system it would work like:
boulder|lane|lane|boulder|turn-lane|bicycle lane
access:lanes=no|yes|yes|no|yes|no
I forgot about this case, too, even though it's increasingly common in the
US (ostensibly to help cyclists get out of the door zone and feel more
comfortable cycling, but inevitably this arrangement causes an inescapable
curbside door zone, pedestrians not looking to cross a lane of traffic
On 2015-02-03 10:20, Paul Johnson wrote:
On Feb 3, 2015 3:06 AM, Colin Smale colin.sm...@xs4all.nl wrote:
Surely there is never a law against breaking down.
And yet, in Oklahoma and Germany, it's considered preventable and, as
such, prohibited on roads with minimum posted limits. The irony
On 2/3/15 4:36 AM, Colin Smale wrote:
Then they are access=no (with foot=yes or whatever as appropriate) or
barrier=boulder. The way is blocked both for emergency services and
mere mortals. No need for access=emergency.
then how do you create a routing engine for use by emergency vehicles?
Hi!
2015-02-03 11:54 GMT+01:00 Richard Welty rwe...@averillpark.net:
On 2/3/15 4:36 AM, Colin Smale wrote:
Then they are access=no (with foot=yes or whatever as appropriate) or
barrier=boulder. The way is blocked both for emergency services and mere
mortals. No need for access=emergency.
On Feb 3, 2015 4:11 AM, Philip Barnes p...@trigpoint.me.uk wrote:
On Tue Feb 3 09:36:21 2015 GMT, Colin Smale wrote:
On 2015-02-03 10:20, Paul Johnson wrote:
On Feb 3, 2015 3:06 AM, Colin Smale colin.sm...@xs4all.nl wrote:
Preventable? How does that look in law? Is that Failure to
Getting back on topic for a moment Hard shoulders should be
access=no, not access=breakdown or access=emergency (the last two
shouldn't even exist IMHO). The baseline is that you shouldn't be there
at all. You get away with it if you have permission (blue lights) or no
choice (breakdown)
Fine. But how do you specify where this lane is or if there is a lane at
all?
2015-02-03 10:05 GMT+01:00 Colin Smale colin.sm...@xs4all.nl:
Surely there is never a law against breaking down. When your car dies,
it dies. If the intention is to persuade people to try to get their dying
vehicle
On Tue Feb 3 09:36:21 2015 GMT, Colin Smale wrote:
On 2015-02-03 10:20, Paul Johnson wrote:
On Feb 3, 2015 3:06 AM, Colin Smale colin.sm...@xs4all.nl wrote:
Preventable? How does that look in law? Is that Failure to maintain
the vehicle or what? What exactly will you get a ticket for?
On Feb 3, 2015 3:37 AM, Colin Smale colin.sm...@xs4all.nl wrote:
On 2015-02-03 10:20, Paul Johnson wrote:
On Feb 3, 2015 3:06 AM, Colin Smale colin.sm...@xs4all.nl wrote:
Surely there is never a law against breaking down.
And yet, in Oklahoma and Germany, it's considered preventable and,
On Feb 3, 2015 3:06 AM, Colin Smale colin.sm...@xs4all.nl wrote:
Surely there is never a law against breaking down.
And yet, in Oklahoma and Germany, it's considered preventable and, as such,
prohibited on roads with minimum posted limits. The irony of this in a
state known for having a high
Hi!
If shoulder lanes are mapped (for whatever reason!), what access
restrictions should we apply? A simple vehicle=no doesn't seem right to me.
In some countries those lanes may be accessed regularly, e.g. by
pedestrians or motorcycles, so foot=yes + motorcycle=yes is obvious, but
what would be
Assuming you are talking about the hard shoulder AKA emergency lane
on motorways, in NL and GB it would quite simply be access=no. The
only exceptions are if you break down, if you are an emergency service,
or if you are instructed to by the police (or similar authority).
On 2015-02-02 14:17,
Seems like a combination of parking tags and access tags are in order.
Typical restrictions in the US would be emergency stopping only,
bicycle=yes, foot=yes unless posted otherwise or, in Oklahoma's case,
there's a minimum speed posted...
On Feb 2, 2015 8:32 AM, Martin Vonwald
Still the question is unanswered: if, for example, one lane is a
emergency/shoulder lane during night and a regular lane during day, how may
we map this?
access:lanes=yes|yes|now_it_is_a_shoulder @ night
access:lanes=yes|yes|yes @ day
So what should we use for now_it_is_a_shoulder? Any what
2015-02-02 15:41 GMT+01:00 Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org:
Typical restrictions in the US would be emergency stopping only
Yes - and what tag would that be for emergency stopping only? I think that
is my main question. Do we have one for that?
___
Now your question is a lot clearer.
The highway=motorway already implies that there is two or more lanes plus
an emergency hard shoulder, but this does not apply to other highways. The
only other tag is the highway=escape which is something completely
different.
I am not aware of any other tag
I agree that access=no (or vehicle=no) leads in the right direction, but we
are still missing the information that it might be accessed in case of
break downs or similar. No? Or don't we care about that?
2015-02-02 15:07 GMT+01:00 Colin Smale colin.sm...@xs4all.nl:
Assuming you are talking
Unfortunately things are changing regarding the Hard Shoulder on UK
motorways. During times of congestion the Hard Shoulder is opened up to
alleviate some of the problem by allow traffic to use it to get to the next
off ramp and leave the motorway. So access=no would only apply some of the
time
On Feb 2, 2015 8:47 AM, Martin Vonwald imagic@gmail.com wrote:
2015-02-02 15:41 GMT+01:00 Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org:
Typical restrictions in the US would be emergency stopping only
Yes - and what tag would that be for emergency stopping only? I think that
is my main question.
Am 02.02.2015 um 16:31 schrieb Martin Vonwald:
Still the question is unanswered: if, for example, one lane is a
emergency/shoulder lane during night and a regular lane during day, how
may we map this?
access:lanes=yes|yes|now_it_is_a_shoulder @ night
access:lanes=yes|yes|yes @ day
On the
40 matches
Mail list logo
