[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Reversible lane (tidal flow)
Hi! This is a follow-up proposal for the :lanes proposal. I suggest the introduction of a new key to tag all kinds of reversible lanes: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/reversible_lane Your comments are welcome. Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Reversible lane (tidal flow)
On 3/26/2012 7:18 AM, Martin Vonwald wrote: Hi! This is a follow-up proposal for the :lanes proposal. I suggest the introduction of a new key to tag all kinds of reversible lanes: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/reversible_lane A center turn lane is not a reversible lane (and reversible_lane=median says to me that there's a movable median barrier). ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Reversible lane (tidal flow)
I took the notation from the wikipedia page linked in the proposal. On the discussions page there is already a thread about the key name. Maybe two_way_lane fits better. Martin P.S: Please use the discussions page of the proposal for comments. 2012/3/26 Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com: On 3/26/2012 7:18 AM, Martin Vonwald wrote: Hi! This is a follow-up proposal for the :lanes proposal. I suggest the introduction of a new key to tag all kinds of reversible lanes: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/reversible_lane A center turn lane is not a reversible lane (and reversible_lane=median says to me that there's a movable median barrier). ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Reversible lane (tidal flow)
On 3/26/2012 7:47 AM, Martin Vonwald wrote: I took the notation from the wikipedia page linked in the proposal. I don't know why Wikipedia groups them, but it at least doesn't say that a center turn lane is a reversible lane. http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2009/part2/part2b.htm#section2B24 Two-Way Left Turn Only (R3-9a or R3-9b) signs (see Figure 2B-6) should be used in conjunction with the required pavement markings where a *non-reversible* lane is reserved for the exclusive use of left-turning vehicles in either direction and is not used for passing, overtaking, or through travel. (emphasis added) ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Reversible lane (tidal flow)
It seems to me, that two-way lane is more widely known for this. So I changed the key to two_way_lane. I also changed the value reversible to tidal_flow (british english) The proposal is now located here: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/two_way_lane Thanks for pointing out! Martin 2012/3/26 Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com: On 3/26/2012 7:47 AM, Martin Vonwald wrote: I took the notation from the wikipedia page linked in the proposal. I don't know why Wikipedia groups them, but it at least doesn't say that a center turn lane is a reversible lane. http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2009/part2/part2b.htm#section2B24 Two-Way Left Turn Only (R3-9a or R3-9b) signs (see Figure 2B-6) should be used in conjunction with the required pavement markings where a *non-reversible* lane is reserved for the exclusive use of left-turning vehicles in either direction and is not used for passing, overtaking, or through travel. (emphasis added) ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] Proposal on a key page?
hello, while reading the reversible proposal i stumbled across the centre turn lanes proposal. this proposal was written on a key page instead of a proposal page. is this a mistake or is there any reason for this? http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:centre_turn_lane bye, andrew ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Reversible lane (tidal flow)
On 3/26/2012 9:26 AM, Martin Vonwald wrote: It seems to me, that two-way lane is more widely known for this. So I changed the key to two_way_lane. I also changed the value reversible to tidal_flow (british english) The proposal is now located here: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/two_way_lane But a two-way lane is not the same. A one-lane two-way road has a single two-way lane. A reversible lane with a moveable barrier is a one-way lane. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Proposal on a key page?
On 3/26/2012 9:44 AM, Andrew Hartley wrote: hello, while reading the reversible proposal i stumbled across the centre turn lanes proposal. this proposal was written on a key page instead of a proposal page. is this a mistake or is there any reason for this? http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:centre_turn_lane I created it there because the purpose was foremost to explain existing tagging. Hence it's not proposed, since multiple mappers already use it. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Proposal on a key page?
I created it there because the purpose was foremost to explain existing tagging. Hence it's not proposed, since multiple mappers already use it. are you sure about this? according to taginfo ( http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=centre_turn_lane) there are 4 users who ever touched a way with this tag. currently there are 796 ways with this tag. and according to your history ( http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/10936901) you changed this tag on 780 ways about two weeks ago. i recommend moving this proposal to the proposed features. especially as two other proposals exist which cover more or less the same issue. andrew ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Proposal on a key page?
On 3/26/2012 10:53 AM, Andrew Hartley wrote: I created it there because the purpose was foremost to explain existing tagging. Hence it's not proposed, since multiple mappers already use it. are you sure about this? according to taginfo (http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=centre_turn_lane) there are 4 users who ever touched a way with this tag. currently there are 796 ways with this tag. and according to your history (http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/10936901) you changed this tag on 780 ways about two weeks ago. Well, that's because I recently changed center_turn_lane to centre_turn_lane. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Proposal on a key page?
On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 4:53 PM, Andrew Hartley andrew.chr.hart...@gmail.com wrote: there are 4 users who ever touched a way with this tag. well... 4 = multiple you changed this tag on 780 ways about two weeks ago. Good catch ! I would love to see such Distribution of users in the keys/values stat tools. Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] reference_point and landmark for addresses
Felix Delattre linux@... writes: I started working on a draft for a proposal: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/addr:reference_point Please help me! This is an important thing to map. I have been looking at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Addresses and it seems that the key addr: is used on each and every single address. an example, the addr:street isn´t used on the street but on the surrounding buildings that uses that street in their adress. with a similar approach, addr:reference_point would be used on all houses having the railway station as a reference. My conclusion is that you should not use addr: for this tag. I suggest to use only reference_point=yes or reference_point=address. Maybe there are other uses for reference_points, what first comes into mind are the survey points: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:man_made% 3Dsurvey_point ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] reference_point and landmark for addresses
On 26/03/12 22:25, Johan Jönsson wrote: Felix Delattre linux@... writes: I started working on a draft for a proposal: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/addr:reference_point Please help me! This is an important thing to map. +1 I have been looking at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Addresses and it seems that the key addr: is used on each and every single address. an example, the addr:street isn´t used on the street but on the surrounding buildings that uses that street in their adress. with a similar approach, addr:reference_point would be used on all houses having the railway station as a reference. We have already to relation types (street [1] and associatedStreet [2]). Why not adapt/extend/rework them ? My conclusion is that you should not use addr: for this tag. I suggest to use only reference_point=yes or reference_point=address. -1 it fits well under addr:* [1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:street [2] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:associatedStreet ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
