Pieren wrote:
Making the task easier in editor does not work if your schema is complex. You can see the current turning lane plugin on JOSM.. .
Yes, actually, that plugin along with the proposal is what made me do it in the first place. The plugin makes the tagging scheme look simple, when it definitely is not.
I was also thinking about a solution like yours but again, we split ways for what I consider a minor information (turning lanes). And the results are quicly becoming unreadable, ex.: "lanes:directions:backward=s;s;p"
lanes:directions should be used in complex cases and is not the main turn lanes tag. For right-hand traffic s;s;p is a default lane arrangement, and lanes:forward=3; lanes:psv:forward=1 are enough (note that those two tags are already approved and being used - I tried to use existing practices).
My idea is to stay simple, only for car turning lanes because most of the contributors will not spend many time for such things (to not say that most of the contributors do not tag lanes at all).
Complex intersections with psv or cycle lanes will need new drawings (polylines for each lane) because the geometry is too complex and offer too many cases for a translation into tags only.
Well, I have a task to map turn lanes (and btw psv/hgv lanes can be used for turning). There were no good proposals for that, without plugins and relations and "lanes:directions:backward=s;s;p". I tried to make it as simple as possible, but if it can be made more simple (without a requirement for mappers to split all bi-directional ways in two) — I'd be happy to improve it.
IZ _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
