On 02/20/2011 08:57 PM, Richard Welty wrote:
On 2/20/11 8:51 PM, Paul Johnson wrote:
On 02/19/2011 08:08 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
Don't we want to break existing consumers if they might route people the
wrong way down a one-way highway?
This whole question suggests that we're somehow
On 2/21/11 9:10 AM, Paul Johnson wrote:
On 02/20/2011 08:57 PM, Richard Welty wrote:
On 2/20/11 8:51 PM, Paul Johnson wrote:
On 02/19/2011 08:08 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
Don't we want to break existing consumers if they might route people the
wrong way down a one-way highway?
This whole
2011/2/21 Richard Welty rwe...@averillpark.net
On 2/21/11 9:10 AM, Paul Johnson wrote:
On 02/20/2011 08:57 PM, Richard Welty wrote:
On 2/20/11 8:51 PM, Paul Johnson wrote:
On 02/19/2011 08:08 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
Don't we want to break existing consumers if they might route people
On 21/02/2011 02:51, Paul Johnson wrote:
This whole question suggests that we're somehow responsible for data
consumers paying more attention to their navigation than what's out
their windshield, which is an entirely specious argument for obvious
reasons.
OSM officially only does the data, not
On 02/19/2011 06:24 PM, Paul Norman wrote:
The Massey Tunnel is currently tagged with oneway=no on the reversible
section and through the tunnel itself.
For the reversible sections (that lead up to the tunnel) they really
alternate between oneway=-1, oneway=yes and access=no. For the two
On 02/19/2011 08:08 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
On 2/19/2011 7:24 PM, Paul Norman wrote:
The Massey Tunnel is currently tagged with oneway=no on the reversible
section and through the tunnel itself.
For the reversible sections (that lead up to the tunnel) they really
alternate between
On 2/20/11 8:51 PM, Paul Johnson wrote:
On 02/19/2011 08:08 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
Don't we want to break existing consumers if they might route people the
wrong way down a one-way highway?
This whole question suggests that we're somehow responsible for data
consumers paying more
On 2/20/2011 9:57 PM, Richard Welty wrote:
On 2/20/11 8:51 PM, Paul Johnson wrote:
On 02/19/2011 08:08 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
Don't we want to break existing consumers if they might route people the
wrong way down a one-way highway?
This whole question suggests that we're somehow
On 02/16/2011 11:59 PM, James Mast wrote:
I'm just curious here, but is there a general consensus on how to tag
roads that have 3+ lanes that have 1 or more lanes that change direction
at certain times while still leaving at least one lane going in each
direction? You know, kinda like the
On 2/19/2011 4:33 PM, Paul Johnson wrote:
A better example would be the George Massey Tunnel on 99, which omits
the oneway= tag completely on both motorways in the contraflow sections.
According to the wiki, highway=motorway* implies oneway=yes (meaning
it's always oneway in the drawn
@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Tagging] Counterflow Lanes
On 2/19/2011 4:33 PM, Paul Johnson wrote:
A better example would be the George Massey Tunnel on 99, which omits
the oneway= tag completely on both motorways in the contraflow sections.
According to the wiki, highway=motorway* implies
On 2/19/2011 7:24 PM, Paul Norman wrote:
The Massey Tunnel is currently tagged with oneway=no on the reversible
section and through the tunnel itself.
For the reversible sections (that lead up to the tunnel) they really
alternate between oneway=-1, oneway=yes and access=no. For the two parallel
Alright, I've tagged the roadway that I was asking this about with the
following:
lanes=3
lanes:counterflow=center
That should work for now.
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/24873632
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
James Mast schreef op vr 18-02-2011 om 05:00 [-0500]:
Alright, I've tagged the roadway that I was asking this about with the
following:
lanes=3
lanes:counterflow=center
Don't you want to descripe the center lane? So
lane(s):center=counterflow makes more sense to me.
Michiel
On 2/18/2011 5:00 AM, James Mast wrote:
Alright, I've tagged the roadway that I was asking this about with the
following:
lanes=3
lanes:counterflow=center
I believe the word is contraflow.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
On 18/02/2011 15:23, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
I believe the word is contraflow.
Contraflow is certainly the version always used in the UK (generally
preceded by an expletive, as in stuck in a *** contraflow for two
hours).
A quick web search found both counterflow and contraflow; maybe
...@gmail.com
To: tagging@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Tagging] Counterflow Lanes
On 2/18/2011 5:00 AM, James Mast wrote:
Alright, I've tagged the roadway that I was asking this about with the
following:
lanes=3
lanes:counterflow=center
I believe the word is contraflow
On 2/18/2011 8:40 PM, James Mast wrote:
NE2, contraflow is for stuff like when an entire highway is reveresed in
an emergancy (like an evacuation)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contraflow_lane_reversal
I did use the correct one here.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counterflow_lane
A reversible
I've personally heard Contraflow mentioned for the switchover's some DOT's
have on Interstates for Hurricane (or other) evacuations in the press. I know
I-95 in Georgia happens to have two such crossovers, but they don't
specifically say contraflow on the signs. Here are links to how they do
On 2/17/2011 12:59 AM, James Mast wrote:
I'm just curious here, but is there a general consensus on how to tag
roads that have 3+ lanes that have 1 or more lanes that change direction
at certain times while still leaving at least one lane going in each
direction? You know, kinda like the Lions
On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 11:13 AM, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com wrote:
I don't know if there's a benefit to being more specific than lanes=3 in
Note that there's already a reasonable amount of traffic simulation
being done based on OSM data. That work is dependent on the number of
lanes
On Thu, 17 Feb 2011 12:06:57 +0200
Nic Roets nro...@gmail.com wrote:
Fortunately there aren't too many reversible lanes in most cities.
Used a lot in Sydney to manage rush hour traffic
I haven't lived there for 30 years so I don't know the current extent
of the practice, but the Harbour Bridge
On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 9:06 PM, Nic Roets nro...@gmail.com wrote:
Note that there's already a reasonable amount of traffic simulation
being done based on OSM data.
Really? Cool...any online simulators?
Steve
___
Tagging mailing list
On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 2:11 PM, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 9:06 PM, Nic Roets nro...@gmail.com wrote:
Note that there's already a reasonable amount of traffic simulation
being done based on OSM data.
Really? Cool...any online simulators?
Not that I know
24 matches
Mail list logo
