On Tue, May 22, 2018, 11:29 Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdre...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > 2018-05-22 17:18 GMT+02:00 Tod Fitch <t...@fitchdesign.com>: > >> In reviewing the wiki in preparation to fixing some of my older mapping, >> it seems there is an inconsistency in how to tag a road that is wide enough >> to two lanes of traffic but is lacking lane striping. >> >> In the lanes description [1] it says "the lanes=* key should be used to >> specify the total number of marked lanes of a road." But in the out of town >> highway tagging sample page [2] with a photo described as "smaller road, >> maybe tertiary with appropriate administrative status" it shows a lane >> count on a road with no markings. >> >> Am I correct in believing that the example photo should have its tagging >> changed, dropping the lanes=2 and adding a width tag (if the width is known >> or can be reasonably estimated)? >> > > > From practise in my area I would think we should drop the requirement of > road markings and leave more freedom to the mapper. If a road is wide > enough for 2 lanes and traffic is using 2 lanes, but there are no road > markings, or currently no road markings, or mostly no road markings, I > would still tag allow to tag 2 lanes. We could add a tag about road > markings, or maybe absence of road markings. > I'm unsure whether to differentiate absence of road markings because they > are not deemed necessary from absence where they once were there but are > not visible any more and someday might return. > > For example on a typical provincial country road with clearly 2 lanes > there will often be no markings. (IMHO lanes=2 as it would be implied also > when not setting a lanes tag), while in another case the situation is more > ambiguous. This is a primary with a wide dual-carriageway, where 2 cars > sometimes fit, while sometimes would require the slower driver to drive on > the shoulder (what actually happens) so the other can overtake. I would be > reluctant to tag these roads with 1.5-2 lanes (unmarked) as lanes=2 (in OSM > it is indeed one lane). > > references, case A: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/487717815 > case B: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/90537120 > if you pay attention on google you can see how it is used as 2 lanes and > even a car surpass: > https://www.google.it/maps/@41.392393,13.0069698,167m/data=!3m1!1e3 > > We've also seen the example of the residential area in Australia where > only the intersections had road markings. > > > > >> >> My current interest is in fixing the tagging for residential roads that >> are wide enough for bi-directional traffic with legal parallel parking but >> have no markings on the pavement. I don't see a exact match to that in >> either the urban [3] or rural highway [2] tagging example pages. >> >> To use the street I live on as an example, am I correct that a >> residential road with bidirectional traffic and parallel parking with no >> markings should be tagged as: >> >> highway=residential >> surface=asphalt >> parking:lane:both=parallel >> width=40’0" >> maxspeed=25 mph >> >> > > to me this seems lanes=2 > In the case of your typical bog standard American residential street, I'm strongly disinclined to agree that this is a two lane situation. I'd be inclined to mark unpainted lanes in the cases where channelization regularly occurs without the pavement markings anyway. This isn't the case on residential streets, as people will tend to drive right up the middle of such streets, only movingly right to meet oncoming traffic and maybe when approaching a stop sign. >
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
