Re: [Tagging] lanes tag dispute
2011/9/19 Kytömaa Lauri lauri.kyto...@aalto.fi: If there is one globally accepted definition of what a lane is, it's the one in the UN Vienna Convention on road signs and signals: Lane means any one of the longitudinal strips into which the carriageway is divisible, whether or not defined by longitudinal road markings, which is wide enough for one moving line of motor vehicles other than motor cycles; So, this includes parking lanes? Or am I misreading it? ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] lanes tag dispute
On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 5:41 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: 2011/9/19 Kytömaa Lauri lauri.kyto...@aalto.fi: Lane means any one of the longitudinal strips into which the carriageway is divisible, whether or not defined by longitudinal road markings, which is wide enough for one moving line of motor vehicles other than motor cycles; OK, this would exclude cyclelanes. To me this definition seems OK Seems okay to me too, pending clarification about parking lanes, and with the caveat that this definition only applies to ways which actually have motor vehicle lanes (i.e. it wouldn't apply to a laned cycleway). ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] lanes tag dispute
Nathan Edgars II wrote: Currently user Alv is trying to redefine the lanes tag to say that it must include all turn lanes: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Key:lanesaction=history Since 2008, the lane tag has been defined as the _physical_ number of lanes. In other words, it doesn't matter what these lanes are intended for: Whether they are, for example, reserved to high occupancy vehicles, or whether they are turn lanes. At least that's how I understand the wiki page. Alv's edits are consistent with this definition, so I do not agree that removing your addition to the page is a redefinition of the lanes tag. Tobias Knerr ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] lanes tag dispute
On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 1:47 PM, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com wrote: Currently user Alv is trying to redefine the lanes tag to say that it must include all turn lanes: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Key:lanesaction=history I've had this discussion before 2007 and I've always said and heard that lanes is always all the lanes on the road. This very easy definition goes back to the first version of the key:lanes page. See: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Key:lanesoldid=85670 So the current wikipage is wrong and too complex. -- /emj ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] lanes tag dispute
2011/9/18 Erik Johansson erjo...@gmail.com: On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 1:47 PM, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com wrote: Currently user Alv is trying to redefine the lanes tag to say that it must include all turn lanes: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Key:lanesaction=history I've had this discussion before 2007 and I've always said and heard that lanes is always all the lanes on the road. This very easy definition goes back to the first version of the key:lanes page. See: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Key:lanesoldid=85670 +1, lanes from the very beginning were to indicate all lanes of the road. Opposed to this was the common practice, not to split an highway because of a short lane for turns (otherwise we would for example have had to split a motorway at every exit which I never saw in the actual data). cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] lanes tag dispute
On 9/18/2011 8:33 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: +1, lanes from the very beginning were to indicate all lanes of the road. Opposed to this was the common practice, not to split an highway because of a short lane for turns (otherwise we would for example have had to split a motorway at every exit which I never saw in the actual data). So it's down to the old prescriptive vs. descriptive debate then. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] lanes tag dispute
On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 2:36 PM, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com wrote: On 9/18/2011 8:33 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: +1, lanes from the very beginning were to indicate all lanes of the road. Opposed to this was the common practice, not to split an highway because of a short lane for turns (otherwise we would for example have had to split a motorway at every exit which I never saw in the actual data). So it's down to the old prescriptive vs. descriptive debate then. The current lanes tag works pretty well for me as a pedestrian, it tells me how many lanes there is on a road. I agree that it gives too little information to be useful for routers etc, but that's because the generic name. Please write something more descriptive to describe the problem and how you think it should be solved. These single sentence responses do not really help. Btw the current wiki page seems to say that you should count cycle lanes in the lanes tag, something I don't really agree with. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] lanes tag dispute
2011/9/18 Erik Johansson erjo...@gmail.com: Btw the current wiki page seems to say that you should count cycle lanes in the lanes tag, something I don't really agree with. +1, maybe we should specify that lanes is about car-lanes (restricted lanes like bus-lanes or cycle-lanes should IMHO be tagged with separate tags.) cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] lanes tag dispute
On 9/18/2011 9:12 AM, Erik Johansson wrote: The current lanes tag works pretty well for me as a pedestrian, it tells me how many lanes there is on a road. This could be more usefully placed in the crossing node. Outside a crosswalk, it's much more useful to know if there's a shelter (raised median or paved and striped) in the middle of the road. Here's an example of what tagging every lane would lead to: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Silly_lane_count.jpg ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] lanes tag dispute
On 18/09/2011 14:21, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: 2011/9/18 Erik Johanssonerjo...@gmail.com: Btw the current wiki page seems to say that you should count cycle lanes in the lanes tag, something I don't really agree with. +1, maybe we should specify that lanes is about car-lanes (restricted lanes like bus-lanes or cycle-lanes should IMHO be tagged with separate tags.) I agree. Dave F. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] lanes tag dispute
On 18/09/2011 16:20, Nathan Edgars II wrote: On 9/18/2011 9:12 AM, Erik Johansson wrote: The current lanes tag works pretty well for me as a pedestrian, it tells me how many lanes there is on a road. This could be more usefully placed in the crossing node. Outside a crosswalk, it's much more useful to know if there's a shelter (raised median or paved and striped) in the middle of the road. I agree it's more useful there, but please remember that jaywalking isn't an offence in many countries. Here's an example of what tagging every lane would lead to: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Silly_lane_count.jpg I see nothing intrinsically wrong with that. Lots of splitting ways tagging admittedly, but that's a problem with OSM its tagging process. Dave F. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] lanes tag dispute
On 9/18/2011 1:12 PM, Anthony wrote: On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 12:59 PM, Nathan Edgars IInerou...@gmail.com wrote: I would use lanes=2 there, since that's how many through lanes there are before the turn lanes begin. And you think any other number of lanes would be *wrong*? No. What I don't agree with is that lanes=2 is missing data or an interim solution. It is simply another way of tagging. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] lanes tag dispute
On 9/18/2011 1:18 PM, Anthony wrote: On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 1:12 PM, Anthonyo...@inbox.org wrote: Yes, mapping every lane as a separate way would be even better, but let's go one step at a time. Actually, I take back that last sentence: http://www.pocketgpsworld.com/reviews/tomtom-v8/v8_lane_assist_northwest2_speed_alert.jpg Do you think Garmin is mapping every lane as a separate way here? I don't think they are, or that they should. I think if I were going to do it, I'd map this as one way up to the theoretical gore point, and then as two ways after the theoretical gore point. I wouldn't use five ways. It's simple on a motorway. But, for a simple example on a surface road, how do you know where the straight lanes go if there are 3 lanes after an intersection but 2 before? And actually, even on a motorway, what if it's 4 lanes to a split of 2 and 3? The assumption is that the second lane from the left can be used to exit, but it's possible that only the leftmost lane is available, and a second lane begins on the ramp right at the gore. Or perhaps there's a short segment of 5 lanes before the split - how do you know which side the new lane forms on? ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] lanes tag dispute
On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 1:17 PM, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com wrote: On 9/18/2011 1:12 PM, Anthony wrote: On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 12:59 PM, Nathan Edgars IInerou...@gmail.com wrote: I would use lanes=2 there, since that's how many through lanes there are before the turn lanes begin. And you think any other number of lanes would be *wrong*? No. What I don't agree with is that lanes=2 is missing data or an interim solution. It is simply another way of tagging. I couldn't disagree with that sentiment more. Tagging the right number of lanes is clearly better than tagging the number of lanes that there used to be. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] lanes tag dispute
On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 1:21 PM, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com wrote: On 9/18/2011 1:18 PM, Anthony wrote: http://www.pocketgpsworld.com/reviews/tomtom-v8/v8_lane_assist_northwest2_speed_alert.jpg Do you think Garmin is mapping every lane as a separate way here? I don't think they are, or that they should. I think if I were going to do it, I'd map this as one way up to the theoretical gore point, and then as two ways after the theoretical gore point. I wouldn't use five ways. It's simple on a motorway. But, for a simple example on a surface road, how do you know where the straight lanes go if there are 3 lanes after an intersection but 2 before? Depends on what data you have. If you have lane width information, then it's easy to figure this out. If you don't, then you can't figure this out. If all lanes are parallel, you certainly don't need a way for every lane, though. But why is this important in the first place? And actually, even on a motorway, what if it's 4 lanes to a split of 2 and 3? The assumption is that the second lane from the left can be used to exit, but it's possible that only the leftmost lane is available, and a second lane begins on the ramp right at the gore. Or perhaps there's a short segment of 5 lanes before the split - how do you know which side the new lane forms on? This can be determined by the geometry of the ways, which are mapped at the center. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] lanes tag dispute
On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 1:34 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote: On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 1:21 PM, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com wrote: It's simple on a motorway. But, for a simple example on a surface road, how do you know where the straight lanes go if there are 3 lanes after an intersection but 2 before? Depends on what data you have. If you have lane width information, then it's easy to figure this out. If you don't, then you can't figure this out. Nevermind. Yes you can. If the center of the 3 lane road is to the left of the center of the 2 lane road, then the lane was added on the left. If the center of the 3 lane road is to the right of the center of the 2 lane road, then the lane was added on the right. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] lanes tag dispute
On 9/18/2011 1:34 PM, Anthony wrote: On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 1:21 PM, Nathan Edgars IInerou...@gmail.com wrote: On 9/18/2011 1:18 PM, Anthony wrote: http://www.pocketgpsworld.com/reviews/tomtom-v8/v8_lane_assist_northwest2_speed_alert.jpg Do you think Garmin is mapping every lane as a separate way here? I don't think they are, or that they should. I think if I were going to do it, I'd map this as one way up to the theoretical gore point, and then as two ways after the theoretical gore point. I wouldn't use five ways. It's simple on a motorway. But, for a simple example on a surface road, how do you know where the straight lanes go if there are 3 lanes after an intersection but 2 before? Depends on what data you have. If you have lane width information, then it's easy to figure this out. If you don't, then you can't figure this out. If all lanes are parallel, you certainly don't need a way for every lane, though. But why is this important in the first place? If you have two intersections in quick succession, and are turning at the second, you want to know which lane to be in at the first. That is, given that we want this sort of thing in the first place. And actually, even on a motorway, what if it's 4 lanes to a split of 2 and 3? The assumption is that the second lane from the left can be used to exit, but it's possible that only the leftmost lane is available, and a second lane begins on the ramp right at the gore. Or perhaps there's a short segment of 5 lanes before the split - how do you know which side the new lane forms on? This can be determined by the geometry of the ways, which are mapped at the center. No they're not. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] lanes tag dispute
On 9/18/2011 1:39 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: On 9/18/2011 1:38 PM, Anthony wrote: On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 1:34 PM, Anthonyo...@inbox.org wrote: On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 1:21 PM, Nathan Edgars IInerou...@gmail.com wrote: It's simple on a motorway. But, for a simple example on a surface road, how do you know where the straight lanes go if there are 3 lanes after an intersection but 2 before? Depends on what data you have. If you have lane width information, then it's easy to figure this out. If you don't, then you can't figure this out. Nevermind. Yes you can. If the center of the 3 lane road is to the left of the center of the 2 lane road, then the lane was added on the left. If the center of the 3 lane road is to the right of the center of the 2 lane road, then the lane was added on the right. Ways are not mapped this way. And even if they were, this would only work if there's a median. Not to mention that the line between the lanes doesn't always go straight through the intersection. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] lanes tag dispute
On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 1:38 PM, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com wrote: This can be determined by the geometry of the ways, which are mapped at the center. No they're not. On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 1:39 PM, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com wrote: On 9/18/2011 1:38 PM, Anthony wrote: Nevermind. Yes you can. If the center of the 3 lane road is to the left of the center of the 2 lane road, then the lane was added on the left. If the center of the 3 lane road is to the right of the center of the 2 lane road, then the lane was added on the right. Ways are not mapped this way. Ways aren't mapped at the center? Where are they mapped? And even if they were, this would only work if there's a median. What's a median got to do with it? On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 1:40 PM, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com wrote: Not to mention that the line between the lanes doesn't always go straight through the intersection. Why does that matter? ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] lanes tag dispute
On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 1:52 PM, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com wrote: On 9/18/2011 1:47 PM, Anthony wrote: Ways aren't mapped at the center? Where are they mapped? Somewhere between the two edge lines. Always using the exact center would require zigzagging whenever lanes are created or destroyed. And mapping wherever and however you feel like it makes for less useful maps. And even if they were, this would only work if there's a median. What's a median got to do with it? When there's no median, the center depends on both directions. If you don't know how many lanes are in each direction, then this is a problem. But you can state how many lanes are in each direction without mapping each lane as a separate way. On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 1:40 PM, Nathan Edgars IInerou...@gmail.com wrote: Not to mention that the line between the lanes doesn't always go straight through the intersection. Why does that matter? Because if the pre-intersection right lane is directly behind the post-intersection center lane, but an angled dashed line forces you into the post-intersection right lane, this cannot be determined without mapping this somehow. The way is supposed to follow the angled dashed lines. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] lanes tag dispute
On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 2:01 PM, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com wrote: On 9/18/2011 2:00 PM, Anthony wrote: The way is supposed to follow the angled dashed lines. I thought the way was supposed to be in the center between the edge lines. Which is it? I never mentioned edge lines. There generally aren't any edge lines in an intersection, are there? The way is supposed to be in the center of the lanes. So if lanes=2, it would be on the dashed line. If lanes=3, it would be between the two dashed lines. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] lanes tag dispute
On 9/18/2011 2:07 PM, Anthony wrote: On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 2:01 PM, Nathan Edgars IInerou...@gmail.com wrote: On 9/18/2011 2:00 PM, Anthony wrote: The way is supposed to follow the angled dashed lines. I thought the way was supposed to be in the center between the edge lines. Which is it? I never mentioned edge lines. There generally aren't any edge lines in an intersection, are there? The way is supposed to be in the center of the lanes. So if lanes=2, it would be on the dashed line. If lanes=3, it would be between the two dashed lines. And if lanes suddenly jumps from 2 to 3, then what? ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] lanes tag dispute
On 9/18/2011 2:15 PM, Anthony wrote: On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 2:10 PM, Nathan Edgars IInerou...@gmail.com wrote: And if lanes suddenly jumps from 2 to 3, then what? Then you split the way. That doesn't answer the question. Where do you put the node connecting the two ways? At the center of the 2 lane part or the 3 lane part? ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] lanes tag dispute
On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 2:23 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote: I'm fine with that if we can be consistent. But that means http://g.co/maps/4j2uh is tagged as lanes=0, lanes:turning:left=2, lanes:turning:right=2. Otherwise, lanes=4, lanes:turning:left=2, lanes:turning:right=2 is ambiguous. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] lanes tag dispute
On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 2:21 PM, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com wrote: On 9/18/2011 2:15 PM, Anthony wrote: On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 2:10 PM, Nathan Edgars IInerou...@gmail.com wrote: And if lanes suddenly jumps from 2 to 3, then what? Then you split the way. That doesn't answer the question. Where do you put the node connecting the two ways? At the center of the 2 lane part or the 3 lane part? There would be one at each. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
