Re: [talk-au] Tagging for the router

On 31/08/16 13:44, Andrew Davidson wrote: > Turn restrictions are, after all, entirely tagging for the router (it's > not like they get rendered on the map). "Tagging for the renderer" (similar to "tagging for the router") is a bad thing when people add _incorrect_ data in order to get it to show

Re: [talk-au] Tagging for the router

On 02/09/16 07:10, Andrew Davidson wrote: Come and visit Canberra; u-turns at traffic lights are permitted. Only where specifically permitted. The "ACT Road Rules", Rule 40 states: "Making a U–turn at an intersection with traffic lights" "A driver must not make a U–turn at an intersection

Re: [talk-au] Tagging for the router

> > and in the rest of Australia as well In Victoria, drivers are allowed to perform u-turns at intersections with or without traffic signals and at breaks in the median unless there is a no U-turn sign(as shown on the right) displayed at that location or applying to that length of road. A

Re: [talk-au] Tagging for the router

On 01/09/16 23:25, Ross wrote: The regional rule won't help in this case. All that the routing engine can see are the nodes connected by ways. In NSW the rule is that you can't do a u-turn at traffic lights and in the rest of Australia as well Come and visit Canberra; u-turns at traffic

Re: [talk-au] Tagging for the router

On 01/09/16 20:27, Andrew Davidson wrote: On 01/09/16 09:37, Nick Hocking wrote: Ok so how do we "ensure that routing engines embody the regional rule:? The regional rule won't help in this case. All that the routing engine can see are the nodes connected by ways. In NSW the rule is

Re: [talk-au] Tagging for the router

On 01/09/16 09:37, Nick Hocking wrote: Ok so how do we "ensure that routing engines embody the regional rule:? The regional rule won't help in this case. All that the routing engine can see are the nodes connected by ways. In NSW the rule is that you can't do a u-turn at traffic lights

Re: [talk-au] Tagging for the router

Hi, I'd suggest the easiest solution is just to change the wiki. Ian. On 1 September 2016 at 09:37, Nick Hocking wrote: > "My suggestion is that the map data is the best place to store that > information." > > Actually - the wiki page is very specific on this. > >

Re: [talk-au] Tagging for the router

When I said that Gosmore (YourNavgation) website had done something stupid, I was wrong. It was the data that was incorrect. I have fixed the data to make the acute angle , where the two carriageways meet up, far more acute (which agrees with the imagery. Once the Yournavigation site updates

Re: [talk-au] Tagging for the router

If the wiki says no then I withdraw my suggestion. Don't want to ruffle too many feathers. Sorry for not having read the mapping guidelines. On 1 Sep 2016 9:38 AM, "Nick Hocking" wrote: > "My suggestion is that the map data is the best place to store that > information."

Re: [talk-au] Tagging for the router

"My suggestion is that the map data is the best place to store that information." Actually - the wiki page is very specific on this. "When a particular turn restriction is *the default* for a given jurisdiction *and* is *not signed* *don't map them*. It is much better to ensure that routing

Re: [talk-au] Tagging for the router

I think that the idea that car navigation is for visitors would mean that it was very important that the routes that get displayed know about local custom. My suggestion is that the map data is the best place to store that information. On 31 Aug 2016 11:42 PM, "Nick Hocking"

Re: [talk-au] Tagging for the router

"I'm assuming you mean the Intersection with Lane Cove Rd. If so it's not permitted to make a u-turn here anyway, as there is no sign permitting u-turns at the traffic signals. So I'd not add it as a restriction as anyone driving there should know that they can not make a u-turn there." Ok -

Re: [talk-au] Tagging for the router

"I'm assuming you mean the Intersection with Lane Cove Rd." No - the intersection with Chiltern Street although it looks as though someone has just added it. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org

Re: [talk-au] Tagging for the router

I'm assuming you mean the Intersection with Lane Cove Rd. If so it's not permitted to make a u-turn here anyway, as there is no sign permitting u-turns at the traffic signals. So I'd not add it as a restriction as anyone driving there should know that they can not make a u-turn there.

Re: [talk-au] Tagging for the router

On 31/08/16 21:23, Leon Kernan wrote: > After all that, i'd only tag a turn restriction if there is a sign > advising such. That's a nice theory but it does mean that there is no way to tell if you are allowed to drive from one incoming way to another outgoing way. Turn restrictions are,

Re: [talk-au] Tagging for the router

Sorry, scratch the oneways, i'm half asleep :-) On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 9:23 PM, Leon Kernan wrote: > I'd fix the fact the oneways are pointed in the wrong direction, change > trunk to trunk_link and add lanes=1. > I'm pretty sure noname is a no no these days as well. > >

Re: [talk-au] Tagging for the router

I'd fix the fact the oneways are pointed in the wrong direction, change trunk to trunk_link and add lanes=1. I'm pretty sure noname is a no no these days as well. After all that, i'd only tag a turn restriction if there is a sign advising such. On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 8:49 PM, Nick Hocking