Re: [Tagging] Cycle boxes for two-stage left turns
On Wed, 8 Jan 2020 at 08:03, marc marc wrote: > Le 08.01.20 à 05:10, Marc Gemis a écrit : > > On Tue, Jan 7, 2020 at 10:30 PM marc marc wrote: > >> keep it simple ! > >> advanced stop box only use a cycleway=asl without relation > >> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:cycleway%3Dasl > >> a single node is not enought ? > > > > The problem I see with this approach is that the node has to be placed > > on the other street than the one the cyclist is using. > > I don't think so. > we must do the same as for a traffic sign stop : > add the node to the affected way with cycleway=tsb or any other value > with the same meaning. Thanks for the suggestion! Looks like this should work for symbolic meaning (with some refinement like cycleway:forward=tsb probably, and perhaps a fully spelled-out value since the acronym is not really established). However it seems a bit problematic geometrically: unlike with a stop sign where we can place the node on where the OSM way crosses the stop line (or a very short extension thereof), here the node needs to be a couple of meters away from the actual box, and not really in a geometrically meaningful position. As far as I can tell the tag cannot be on the intersection node itself as I can't see a way to reliably indicate which of the crossing ways has a turn box. See example at https://bin.piorkowski.ca/2020/osm_cycleway_tsb_on_node.png (note is only explanatory here) Routers would then have to look for a cycleway=tsb node shortly before a possible left turn. Would this be preferable from an algorithm's point of view to looking for a relation? Thanks! --Jarek ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Cycle boxes for two-stage left turns
On Wed, 8 Jan 2020 at 10:00, Paul Johnson wrote: > On Mon, Dec 16, 2019 at 7:06 PM Jarek Piórkowski wrote: >> I'm looking for a way to tag designated areas where cyclists wait to >> safely make a far turn (in right-hand-drive regions, a left turn). >> I'll call them "left turn boxes" for short though pointers to a better >> name would be welcome! >> Since it's basically a short, mode-restricted turn lane, why not tag it as such? turn:lanes=whatever|left, access:lanes=whatever|no, bicycle:lanes=whatever|designated? This seems like it should work. I was a little wary at first, since wiki for Key:lanes states "Count excludes cycle lanes. For tagging cycle lanes see cycleway=*. " However the example in https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Lanes#Crossing_with_a_designated_lane_for_bicycles seems fitting, and the following seems to be liked well enough by JOSM validator: https://bin.piorkowski.ca/2020/osm_bicycle_lanes_on_way.png access:lanes:forward=||no bicycle:lanes:forward=||designated cycleway:lanes:forward=none|none|lane cycleway=lane turn:lanes:forward=left|none|left Trying to go further and indicate also the through-going (painted) bicycle lane (as done in the wiki example linked above) I arrive at: https://bin.piorkowski.ca/2020/osm_bicycle_lanes_on_way_with_cycle_lane.png access:lanes:forward=||no|no bicycle:lanes:forward=||designated|designated cycleway:lanes:forward=none|none|lane|lane cycleway=lane (redundant?) lanes:bicycle:forward=2 turn:lanes:forward=left|none|none|left That seems to describe the logic of the way fully. However that is quite a lot of tags and seems easy to get it wrong. JOSM will warn in case of mismatch, but it's not exactly straightforward... hm... Thanks! --Jarek ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Cycle boxes for two-stage left turns
On Mon, Dec 16, 2019 at 7:06 PM Jarek Piórkowski wrote: > Hello, > > I'm looking for a way to tag designated areas where cyclists wait to > safely make a far turn (in right-hand-drive regions, a left turn). > I'll call them "left turn boxes" for short though pointers to a better > name would be welcome! > Since it's basically a short, mode-restricted turn lane, why not tag it as such? turn:lanes=whatever|left, access:lanes=whatever|no, bicycle:lanes=whatever|designated? ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Cycle boxes for two-stage left turns
Le 08.01.20 à 05:10, Marc Gemis a écrit : > On Tue, Jan 7, 2020 at 10:30 PM marc marc wrote: >> >> Le 06.01.20 à 04:19, Jarek Piórkowski a écrit : >>> Comments most welcome! >> >> keep it simple ! >> advanced stop box only use a cycleway=asl without relation >> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:cycleway%3Dasl >> a single node is not enought ? > > The problem I see with this approach is that the node has to be placed > on the other street than the one the cyclist is using. I don't think so. we must do the same as for a traffic sign stop : add the node to the affected way with cycleway=tsb or any other value with the same meaning. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Cycle boxes for two-stage left turns
On Tue, Jan 7, 2020 at 10:30 PM marc marc wrote: > > Le 06.01.20 à 04:19, Jarek Piórkowski a écrit : > > Comments most welcome! > > keep it simple ! > advanced stop box only use a cycleway=asl without relation > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:cycleway%3Dasl > a single node is not enought ? The problem I see with this approach is that the node has to be placed on the other street than the one the cyclist is using. In the picture of the original mail, suppose a cyclist is coming from the south and wants to turn to the west. The logical place to put the box is by adding a node on the street to the east. But how wouldn't that complicate things for routers, as the road to the east is not part of the itinerary? m. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Cycle boxes for two-stage left turns
On Tue, 7 Jan 2020 at 19:41, Morten Lange via Tagging wrote: > On-street markings for a two-stage left-turn were recently introduced on a > few roads/streets in Oslo, Norway. > > I think > cycleway:asl=two_stage_left_turn > looks okay. > > But since there is > cycleway=asl > > why not use > cycleway=two_stage_left_turn Hi Morten, What element would you use this cycleway=two_stage_left_turn tag on? A node, a way, a relation? > Sadly taking a two-stage left turn is obligatory in some countries. > Are there any known examples where they are not obligatory but exceptions are > marked with trafficsigns? (Or the opposite) I'm not familiar with any, but then my jurisdiction's road laws and signs are barely aware that bicycles exist, so there might well be some elsewhere. Thanks, --Jarek ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Cycle boxes for two-stage left turns
On Tue, 7 Jan 2020 at 12:15, Florimond Berthoux wrote: > Hello, > > I think it’s a good thing to map these two stage turn for bicycles. > I can’t see better solution than using relation (unless doing surface > mapping...). > > Le lun. 6 janv. 2020 à 04:21, Jarek Piórkowski a écrit : > > - relation with tag type=bicycle_two_stage_turn (comments on this > > particularly welcome! it doesn't really seem to be a route=bicycle > > since it doesn't have a designated network=*?) > If we copy what we have in France for give way for cyclist at traffic light > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Bicycle#Panonceaux_de_C.C3.A9dez-le-passage_cycliste_au_feu > type=restriction > restriction:bicycle=two_stage_turn > And the relation have three members with from, via, to. Hm, I would think that a restriction-type relation would necessarily restrict what's possible, whereas a two-stage turn box gives more possibilities rather than takes away possibilities (at least in cases where it's not mandatory). However: Does the French sign mean that the cyclist is not required to obey a red light but instead is only required to yield? If yes, then that's similar to the two-stage turn box (it gives more possibilities rather than restricts), and if that's already established, I'll be happy to go along with a similar scheme. > > - optionally segregated=yes if there is a designated, separated > > waiting area for the bikes rather than only a painted area that is > > also driven over by other vehicles (would usually be at particularly > > wide intersections or at T-intersections) > I disagree, today the use of segregated key is for path where the segregation > is made from painting line. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:segregated > If we use the key segrageted for physically segragation by kerb or island > that can lead easily to mistakes. > May be use waiting_area=painting_box if there is only painting, and > waiting_area=track ? island ? if it is physically protected. Ah right, then let's not use segregated. If there is no better existing tag to reuse, a waiting_area=painted_box and waiting_area=track seem good to me. Or to match values in https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:cycleway#Dedicated_cycle_lanes how about waiting_area=advisory and waiting_area=exclusive? > I think it can be interessting to know if the two stage turn is mandatory or > not for the cyclist, I’m not talking about national law here but only if > there is a traffic sign saying this obligation. > mandatory=yes ? Yeah, that could work. `mandatory` is already in use on the Key:cycleway wiki page as linked above, so using it as mandatory=yes could work (if indeed there is such an obligation somewhere). Thanks, --Jarek ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Cycle boxes for two-stage left turns
Hi, On-street markings for a two-stage left-turn were recently introduced on a few roads/streets in Oslo, Norway. I think cycleway:asl=two_stage_left_turn looks okay. But since there is cycleway=asl why not use cycleway=two_stage_left_turn Sadly taking a two-stage left turn is obligatory in some countries. Are there any known examples where they are not obligatory but exceptions are marked with trafficsigns? (Or the opposite) -- Regards / Kveðja / Hilsen Morten Lange On Wednesday, 8 January 2020, 00:52:14 CET, Jarek Piórkowski wrote: On Tue, 7 Jan 2020 at 16:29, marc marc wrote: > > Le 06.01.20 à 04:19, Jarek Piórkowski a écrit : > > Comments most welcome! > > keep it simple ! > advanced stop box only use a cycleway=asl without relation > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:cycleway%3Dasl > a single node is not enought ? Hi Marc, I wrote the following about cycleway=asl in the original message, do you have any further thoughts on these objections against using ASL node? "To my understanding, this is not the same as a cycleway=asl (advanced stop line, "bike box") in OSM as an ASL is _behind_ the stop line and behind the pedestrian crossing, and thus not really easily usable for left turns [from the way not tagged with ASL] - cyclists would have to cross the stream of pedestrians to get into the box. ... Looking for an alternatives to a relation, I came up with https://bin.piorkowski.ca/2019/possible_asl_node_tagging.png and described it as following: "I suppose something like this could work to avoid a relation, routers would then have to look for cycleway:asl=two_stage_left_turn a little to the right of where they'd like to make a left turn. ... Disadvantages: the portrayed distance to turn off to right is further than the actual distance; routers might well find it easier to find left turns as they would normally and then prioritize those with a bicycle_two_stage_left_turn relation ... frankly I don't really like that solution much, and the other editor contributing in the Slack thread thought it would be "misleading, since the box is on a way not actually involved in the turn"." Thanks, --Jarek ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Cycle boxes for two-stage left turns
On Tue, 7 Jan 2020 at 16:29, marc marc wrote: > > Le 06.01.20 à 04:19, Jarek Piórkowski a écrit : > > Comments most welcome! > > keep it simple ! > advanced stop box only use a cycleway=asl without relation > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:cycleway%3Dasl > a single node is not enought ? Hi Marc, I wrote the following about cycleway=asl in the original message, do you have any further thoughts on these objections against using ASL node? "To my understanding, this is not the same as a cycleway=asl (advanced stop line, "bike box") in OSM as an ASL is _behind_ the stop line and behind the pedestrian crossing, and thus not really easily usable for left turns [from the way not tagged with ASL] - cyclists would have to cross the stream of pedestrians to get into the box. ... Looking for an alternatives to a relation, I came up with https://bin.piorkowski.ca/2019/possible_asl_node_tagging.png and described it as following: "I suppose something like this could work to avoid a relation, routers would then have to look for cycleway:asl=two_stage_left_turn a little to the right of where they'd like to make a left turn. ... Disadvantages: the portrayed distance to turn off to right is further than the actual distance; routers might well find it easier to find left turns as they would normally and then prioritize those with a bicycle_two_stage_left_turn relation ... frankly I don't really like that solution much, and the other editor contributing in the Slack thread thought it would be "misleading, since the box is on a way not actually involved in the turn"." Thanks, --Jarek ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Cycle boxes for two-stage left turns
Le 06.01.20 à 04:19, Jarek Piórkowski a écrit : > Comments most welcome! keep it simple ! advanced stop box only use a cycleway=asl without relation https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:cycleway%3Dasl a single node is not enought ? ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Cycle boxes for two-stage left turns
Hello, I think it’s a good thing to map these two stage turn for bicycles. I can’t see better solution than using relation (unless doing surface mapping...). Le lun. 6 janv. 2020 à 04:21, Jarek Piórkowski a écrit : > - relation with tag type=bicycle_two_stage_turn (comments on this > particularly welcome! it doesn't really seem to be a route=bicycle > since it doesn't have a designated network=*?) If we copy what we have in France for give way for cyclist at traffic light https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Bicycle#Panonceaux_de_C.C3.A9dez-le-passage_cycliste_au_feu type=restriction restriction:bicycle=two_stage_turn And the relation have three members with from, via, to. > - optionally segregated=yes if there is a designated, separated > waiting area for the bikes rather than only a painted area that is > also driven over by other vehicles (would usually be at particularly > wide intersections or at T-intersections) I disagree, today the use of segregated key is for path where the segregation is made from painting line. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:segregated If we use the key segrageted for physically segragation by kerb or island that can lead easily to mistakes. May be use waiting_area=painting_box if there is only painting, and waiting_area=track ? island ? if it is physically protected. I think it can be interessting to know if the two stage turn is mandatory or not for the cyclist, I’m not talking about national law here but only if there is a traffic sign saying this obligation. mandatory=yes ? -- Florimond Berthoux ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Cycle boxes for two-stage left turns
Hello, Just a bump here to see if anyone has opinions about tagging for infrastructure allowing for two-stage bicycle turns. Please see original message quoted below for more details. I'm currently thinking of using the following: - relation with tag type=bicycle_two_stage_turn (comments on this particularly welcome! it doesn't really seem to be a route=bicycle since it doesn't have a designated network=*?) - optionally segregated=yes if there is a designated, separated waiting area for the bikes rather than only a painted area that is also driven over by other vehicles (would usually be at particularly wide intersections or at T-intersections) - members as in a turn restriction relation: `from` and `to` ways, and `via` either node or way Comments most welcome! If there are no comments here, I suppose I will create a tagging proposal on wiki in a couple of days. Thanks, --Jarek On Mon, 16 Dec 2019 at 20:05, Jarek Piórkowski wrote: > > Hello, > > I'm looking for a way to tag designated areas where cyclists wait to > safely make a far turn (in right-hand-drive regions, a left turn). > I'll call them "left turn boxes" for short though pointers to a better > name would be welcome! > > They're paint-designated places for cyclists to wait to do a two-stage > left turn from the right edge of the roadway. In regions that allow > right turn on red traffic signal, they are usually coupled with > no-right-turn-on-red restrictions. See for example > https://bin.piorkowski.ca/2019/two_stage_left_turn.png - screenshot of > Esri imagery for https://osm.org/node/25813496 at > 43.6670781,-79.3746698 > > To my understanding, this is not the same as a cycleway=asl (advanced > stop line, "bike box") in OSM as an ASL is _behind_ the stop line and > behind the pedestrian crossing, and thus not really easily usable for > left turns - cyclists would have to cross the stream of pedestrians to > get into the box. > > I am aware that in many regions left turn boxes are common to the > point of being basically the default at bigger intersections, and thus > doesn't really need tagging. However, the area I'm mapping has > probably a single digit amount of them. As they make left turns a lot > safer, I would like to map them so that routers can prefer them. > > Does anyone know of an established way to tag these that I could adopt? > > To tag unambiguously and in a computer-readable way, I guess it'll > need a relation from-to-via? > > Previously discussed in OSM Canada Slack, #general channel on October > 16, 2019 > https://osm-ca.slack.com/archives/C36U69X18/p157123002600?thread_ts=1571265183.002300&cid=C36U69X18 > but we didn't come up with much. Looking for an alternatives to a > relation, I came up with > https://bin.piorkowski.ca/2019/possible_asl_node_tagging.png and > described it as following: "I suppose something like this could work > to avoid a relation, routers would then have to look for > cycleway:asl=two_stage_left_turn a little to the right of where they'd > like to make a left turn. Advantages: no relations - they seem to be > somewhat disliked in OSM; representation as turn-right-then-U-turn is > somewhat like how cyclists are used to turning left at hostile > intersections. Disadvantages: the portrayed distance to turn off to > right is further than the actual distance; routers might well find it > easier to find left turns as they would normally and then prioritize > those with a bicycle_two_stage_left_turn relation" > > But frankly I don't really like that solution much, and the other > editor contributing in the Slack thread thought it would be > "misleading, since the box is on a way not actually involved in the > turn". > > Thanks for any leads! > > --Jarek ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] Cycle boxes for two-stage left turns
Hello, I'm looking for a way to tag designated areas where cyclists wait to safely make a far turn (in right-hand-drive regions, a left turn). I'll call them "left turn boxes" for short though pointers to a better name would be welcome! They're paint-designated places for cyclists to wait to do a two-stage left turn from the right edge of the roadway. In regions that allow right turn on red traffic signal, they are usually coupled with no-right-turn-on-red restrictions. See for example https://bin.piorkowski.ca/2019/two_stage_left_turn.png - screenshot of Esri imagery for https://osm.org/node/25813496 at 43.6670781,-79.3746698 To my understanding, this is not the same as a cycleway=asl (advanced stop line, "bike box") in OSM as an ASL is _behind_ the stop line and behind the pedestrian crossing, and thus not really easily usable for left turns - cyclists would have to cross the stream of pedestrians to get into the box. I am aware that in many regions left turn boxes are common to the point of being basically the default at bigger intersections, and thus doesn't really need tagging. However, the area I'm mapping has probably a single digit amount of them. As they make left turns a lot safer, I would like to map them so that routers can prefer them. Does anyone know of an established way to tag these that I could adopt? To tag unambiguously and in a computer-readable way, I guess it'll need a relation from-to-via? Previously discussed in OSM Canada Slack, #general channel on October 16, 2019 https://osm-ca.slack.com/archives/C36U69X18/p157123002600?thread_ts=1571265183.002300&cid=C36U69X18 but we didn't come up with much. Looking for an alternatives to a relation, I came up with https://bin.piorkowski.ca/2019/possible_asl_node_tagging.png and described it as following: "I suppose something like this could work to avoid a relation, routers would then have to look for cycleway:asl=two_stage_left_turn a little to the right of where they'd like to make a left turn. Advantages: no relations - they seem to be somewhat disliked in OSM; representation as turn-right-then-U-turn is somewhat like how cyclists are used to turning left at hostile intersections. Disadvantages: the portrayed distance to turn off to right is further than the actual distance; routers might well find it easier to find left turns as they would normally and then prioritize those with a bicycle_two_stage_left_turn relation" But frankly I don't really like that solution much, and the other editor contributing in the Slack thread thought it would be "misleading, since the box is on a way not actually involved in the turn". Thanks for any leads! --Jarek ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
