Hi! Following discussions in this list and in couple of forum threads
(and since there are some eager nav software programmers that wish to
use the first proposal they see), I studied all of the proposals for
tagging turn lanes and made a compound tagging scheme, which is not hard
to use, but
n Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 8:17 AM, Ilya Zverev zve...@textual.ru wrote:
I was thinking about something similar excepted one important thing :
I think that many contributors don't like to break the way in many
small segments just for turning lanes. I think that adding a simple
node when the turning
e.g. trunk_turnlanes:left:forward=1 meaning that from this point we
have
a left turning lane till the next intersection with a trunk highway
('forward' or 'backward' being relative to the osm way direction as
usual).
So, are you suggesting to use :forward/backward on nodes? I don't think
that
The tag lanes should be reserved for the straight
forward lanes.
At a T-junction, the road ending there would then be
lanes=0, given that wording. Nice.
As a result, we just add a node for a minor information and do not
damage the existing highways.
There's bound to be, eventually, enormous
On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 10:52 AM, Ilya Zverev zve...@textual.ru wrote:
So, are you suggesting to use :forward/backward on nodes? I don't think that
would go well. It is worse that using relations, since the node is
implicitly related with a) direction of a way; b) the fact that way is not
split
On Thu, 6 Oct 2011, Pieren wrote:
On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 10:52 AM, Ilya Zverev zve...@textual.ru wrote:
The big problem is that mappers think splitting ways is damaging them. Why?
It's just painful to work with many small segments (to add or rename
tags or use route relations). People
2011/10/6 Kytömaa Lauri lauri.kyto...@aalto.fi:
What value does it add, to try to keep the roads from being split midblock?
For the same reasons why the first OSM api had segments and was
replaced by ways. It makes editing and maintenance painful, you
don't see where your street is starting and
On Thu, 6 Oct 2011, Kytömaa Lauri wrote:
The tag lanes should be reserved for the straight
forward lanes.
At a T-junction, the road ending there would then be
lanes=0, given that wording. Nice.
...And it gets even funnier if you have an intersection where all those
straight forward lanes
Hi.
Some remarks have been mentioned here already, why this proposal is not
well designed.
Another one is, that it's tackling the lanes-problem, but not solving it.
You propose something for turning lanes - but again restrict it to cars.
The talk page in the wiki contains a question about
Peter Wendorff wrote:
Some remarks have been mentioned here already, why this proposal is
not
well designed.
Another one is, that it's tackling the lanes-problem, but not solving
it.
You propose something for turning lanes - but again restrict it to
cars.
It was not my decision, but was the
On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 11:10 AM, Ilpo Järvinen
ilpo.jarvi...@helsinki.fi wrote:
however, it should not be solved using some data klugde but
making the tasks you mention easy to do in editors even if the ways would
contain only two nodes each.
Making the task easier in editor does not work if
On Thu, 6 Oct 2011, Pieren wrote:
On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 11:10 AM, Ilpo Järvinen
ilpo.jarvi...@helsinki.fi wrote:
however, it should not be solved using some data klugde but
making the tasks you mention easy to do in editors even if the ways would
contain only two nodes each.
Making the
12 matches
Mail list logo