So how is this different from placement=transition, then? On Jun 13, 2018 01:04, <osm.tagg...@thorsten.engler.id.au> wrote:
No you don’t. transit:lanes describes how the lanes from the end of one way connect to the end of another way in the direction of traffic flow. For each pair of from/to ways, there is going to be exactly one node where they connect. That is your via node. *From:* Paul Johnson <ba...@ursamundi.org> *Sent:* Wednesday, 13 June 2018 08:46 *To:* Tag discussion, strategy and related tools <tagging@openstreetmap.org> *Subject:* Re: [Tagging] I can't support transit:lanes You'd have more than one via way for the transit:lanes relation. On Tue, Jun 12, 2018, 01:11 Mateusz Konieczny <matkoni...@tutanota.com> wrote: 11. Jun 2018 23:02 by ba...@ursamundi.org: On Sun, Jun 10, 2018, 23:43 Bryan Housel <bhou...@gmail.com> wrote: The only way I’ll be able to support lane transitions would be as a relation that has similar semantics to turn restrictions.. from/via/to. Keep it simple (no multi via ways please). This is already an understood way of tagging things that connect 2 ways. Driveway in the middle of a lane transition with turn restrictions. What now? No problem? Why it would be an issue? _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
