Hi > Message: 5
> Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2012 16:50:37 +0200
> From: Janko Miheli? <[email protected]>
> To: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools"
> <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: [Tagging] Carriageway divider
> Message-ID:
> <CAA=vpS8RO=fzski4unsbzystsq3fjr1-x9l2phnh-nhqgxz...@mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> 2012/8/20 Markus Lindholm <[email protected]>
>
> >
> > Yes, I understand why one would reassemble highway segments on a route
> > that only differ on the maxspeed tag or other such minor issue. But
> > why would one want to reassemble two highways going in opposite
> > direction and from which there is no direct legal route to the other?
> >
>
> What about the roads in the countryside? Would you divide roads into lanes
> if there is a full line, like in the following picture:
>
> http://i.imgur.com/p5Oto.png
>
> Janko Miheli?
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL:
> <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20120820/f9c4da73/attachment-0001.html>
> Hi, I made a earlier tribute to this one and Janko made the right pic. Its
> very hard to gather the right intel.
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2012 16:53:38 +0200
> From: Pieren <[email protected]>
> To: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools"
> <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: [Tagging] Carriageway divider
> Message-ID:
> <capt3zjoj0wkqhm0rxxcjr-_yzeq78l_ic4eg-ctc1rgcqzb...@mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 4:21 PM, Markus Lindholm
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> The proposal with "divider=solid_line" has a disadvantage : the
> meaning of a solid line differs in countries/continents. It should be
> better tagged with "divider=no_u_turn" or "no_crossing" or whatever
> you like describing the restriction, not the painted line itself.
> Another issue is the limitation of one divider per OSM way.
>
> > As I said earlier physical separation doesn't necessary mean "cannot
> > pass",
>
> And so what ? The standard defining the limit for dividing highways is
> long established in OSM (since beginning).
>
> > I think that it would be a more pressing objective to be able to
> > provide a legal route from A to B than to cater for all the shortcuts
> > that are possible but not legal. Of course the former doesn't exclude
> > the latter and one could conceive of new schemes to indicate where
> > it's possible to drive but not legal.
>
> Of course. Like drawing all possible ways to cross a wood. Or the
> points where you can climb a wall or a fence. Endless, no ?
>
> Pieren
>
The governement (Dutch) has made a rule to minimize the load of signs. Look at
the lines and youll know whats allowed, speed and other rules. But its
different everywhere, distances overseas are most of the time larger of longer
then in Europe.These roads and the premisses aside are not joint directly,
mostly by a parallel route or road. But its not save to have a routeprogramm
(which tells you to take a left turn when its not allowed), not for the
following traffic and the opposite direction. I would advice and vote against,
its not the first listener who followes the program blindly into the harbor,
blub, she said take a left turn !Hendrik
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
