Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] Freeway exit tagging

Tagging maxspeed is purely for a router. So are turn restrictions. As for turn:lanes meant for complex intersectionsthe examples in the wiki show very simple uses. I can't see anything in it, or the discussion page, indicating that it is only for complex intersections. Certainly there is a

Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] Freeway exit tagging

On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 12:18 PM, David Mease wrote: > I thing my reservations about this type of tagging is that this may be > "tagging for the router". > On some level, all of it is. > I still view the turn:lanes scheme as a (probably incomplete) way of > describing

Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] Freeway exit tagging

On Thu, Sep 1, 2016 at 8:56 PM, Jack Burke wrote: > Would love to compare notes on that, but it'll have to be later next week. > > If you want to look at what I do for exits, feel free to examine pretty > much all of them on I 75 south of Atlanta, as well as through downtown.

Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] Freeway exit tagging

Would love to compare notes on that, but it'll have to be later next week. If you want to look at what I do for exits, feel free to examine pretty much all of them on I 75 south of Atlanta, as well as through downtown. --jack On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 4:25 PM, Paul Johnson

Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] Freeway exit tagging

On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 2:05 PM, Jack Burke wrote: > > This exit has no turn lane. There is no staging lane prior to the exit > where tags could be placed, one should not be created just so that there is > a place to put tags. > > This freeway should not be split. You said

Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] Freeway exit tagging

I've given it a little minor tag-completion update if anybody wants to compare notes. On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 11:00 AM, Duane Gearhart wrote: > FYI - the exit 78 interchange information has been updated. The Mapzen > directions are calling out the exit as you expected >

Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] Freeway exit tagging

> This exit has no turn lane. There is no staging lane prior to the exit where tags could be placed, one should not be created just so that there is a place to put tags. > This freeway should not be split. You said yourself that the exit is not part of the freeway itself, so tags should not be

Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] Freeway exit tagging

sent from a phone Il giorno 27 ago 2016, alle ore 21:45, Paul Johnson ha scritto: >> (you are in a motorway, with exits each 1,2,3 kms.) Where is groundtruth >> mapping? > > talk-de doesn't have a monopoly on attention to detail, you know. +1 besides the

Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] Freeway exit tagging

On Sat, Aug 27, 2016 at 2:25 PM, yo paseopor wrote: > > if you add the way for the forth lane at the point where it starts (as >> opposed to the point where you latestly could change) you will get less >> optimal routing suggestions in the case the route is calculated from

Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] Freeway exit tagging

> if you add the way for the forth lane at the point where it starts (as > opposed to the point where you latestly could change) you will get less > optimal routing suggestions in the case the route is calculated from after > the start of this lane (because your navigator will think you can't

Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] Freeway exit tagging

On Sat, Aug 27, 2016 at 10:30 AM, yo paseopor wrote: > I don't know for 4th lane so short if it's better to mantain three lanes > and then "create a way with one lane" to join or to exit the motorway. It's > clear and the driver or the data will be there to decide which

Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] Freeway exit tagging

2016-08-27 17:30 GMT+02:00 yo paseopor : > I don't know for 4th lane so short if it's better to mantain three lanes > and then "create a way with one lane" to join or to exit the motorway. It's > clear and the driver or the data will be there to decide which lane is > better

Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] Freeway exit tagging

I don't know for 4th lane so short if it's better to mantain three lanes and then "create a way with one lane" to join or to exit the motorway. It's clear and the driver or the data will be there to decide which lane is better for him, I think it is not a problem making the change of lane by the

Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] Freeway exit tagging

On Sat, Aug 27, 2016 at 5:14 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > what would you suggest in this case (common on this motorway ring): > https://www.google.it/maps/@41.897599,12.3821544,3a,75y, > 350.16h,82.29t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sb1o9_JZ0Vq_WPwrk5Bu4Fw! >

Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] Freeway exit tagging

For me the image is clear, the lane marks on the 4th right lane are shorter than the other marks. Also the upper traffic signs marks you two closer exits, this is the reason the big traffic signs explain you all the possibilities. If you go little bit to the next two pics you see the directions

Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] Freeway exit tagging

what would you suggest in this case (common on this motorway ring): https://www.google.it/maps/@41.897599,12.3821544,3a,75y,350.16h,82.29t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sb1o9_JZ0Vq_WPwrk5Bu4Fw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en There are three through lanes, but the traffic signs are indicating the right lane to be

Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] Freeway exit tagging

> On Aug 26, 2016, at 10:48 AM, Paul Johnson wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 9:44 AM, yo paseopor > wrote: > If you know which turn:lane it is you can specify it instead there's no > marks. In Spain, with

Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] Freeway exit tagging

On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 9:44 AM, yo paseopor wrote: > If you know which turn:lane it is you can specify it instead there's no > marks. In Spain, with administrations in crisis some of them don't paint > all the lanes (before the crisis they painted all the lanes). So I

Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] Freeway exit tagging

On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 11:31 AM, Georg Feddern wrote: > Am 26.08.2016 um 14:18 schrieb Kieron Thwaites: > >> I can, however, see the rationale behind tagging "none;slight_right", >> as well as tagging nothing at all, and as such, I think that this is >> an issue that we

Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] Freeway exit tagging

Am 26.08.2016 um 14:18 schrieb Kieron Thwaites: I can, however, see the rationale behind tagging "none;slight_right", as well as tagging nothing at all, and as such, I think that this is an issue that we need to find consensus on. That said, I believe Paul is quite correct with his statement

Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] Freeway exit tagging

If you know which turn:lane it is you can specify it instead there's no marks. In Spain, with administrations in crisis some of them don't paint all the lanes (before the crisis they painted all the lanes). So I think we can explain the destination...if we know it, and if we want to do it (put

Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] Freeway exit tagging

It is quite simple, If there is a through arrow, the value is through. If there is no arrow, the value is none. Groundtruth mapping! Cheers, Johan 2016-08-26 15:41 GMT+02:00 Paul Johnson : > On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 8:19 AM, yo paseopor wrote: > >> I

Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] Freeway exit tagging

On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 8:19 AM, yo paseopor wrote: > I think you can specify the information you know instead this information > is not explicit written on the road. So for me , in my opinion it is better > specify through or whatever will be the direction that none or

Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] Freeway exit tagging

I think you can specify the information you know instead this information is not explicit written on the road. So for me , in my opinion it is better specify through or whatever will be the direction that none or |" " (blank) or something like that. yopaseopor

Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] Freeway exit tagging

On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 7:51 AM, yo paseopor wrote: > I think it is so clear. Instead of no painting marks with an arrow, you > have some vertical signs and also no_change lane marks, so for me it is > clear how it works. With all traffic signs, posted I think the junction

Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] Freeway exit tagging

I think it is so clear. Instead of no painting marks with an arrow, you have some vertical signs and also no_change lane marks, so for me it is clear how it works. With all traffic signs, posted I think the junction will have all the information software needs to process it. Also I think it is tru

Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] Freeway exit tagging

I can't comment whether this is "proper" usage or not, but I can illustrate how I've personally tagged lanes at freeway exits: Take, for example, this freeway interchange close to where I grew up (note: left-hand drive): https://goo.gl/maps/5eF35SVed452 There's no lane markings to indicate

Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] Freeway exit tagging

On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 11:06 PM, David Mease wrote: > Road markings are both beneficial and useful for navigation. Cities and > governments have paid a lot of money installing them all over globe > precisely for these reasons. OSM would be well served to include them >

Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] Freeway exit tagging

On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 4:28 PM, Rihards wrote: > On 2016.08.26. 00:15, Jack Burke wrote: > >> Freeway exit tagging >> >> >> I am totally confused. >> >> What is the proper method to use turn:lanes to tag freeway lanes >> approaching an exit, where the exit branches directly