I would leave the short passing_place as is, i.e. the one that also
gives space to pass oncoming traffic. For the ones intended for letting
same direction traffic pass I would really not differentiate by short
(what is short?), long or alternating.
/Tobi
Am 08.09.2018 um 02:29 schrieb Warin:
If the short 'passing_place' is tagged the same as a longer lane ..
then how is it distinguished?
You cannot count on the mapper to mark the length of it every time.
So a 100 meter one could have the same tagging as a 10 meter one. That
is not good.
I think the present tag of passing_place needs to be retained with the
present definition.
If the use of the lanes tag or a separate service road tag is not good
enough for these longer 'turn outs' then there needs to be some new tag.
On 06/09/18 22:56, Tobias Wrede wrote:
Hi,
I've just come back from three weeks vacation in the Sierra Nevada
with an RV. I've used turnouts there extensively. Mostly, they were
long enough to me not having to stop while I let the traffic pass.
But there were also the occasional ones (marked) that were just a 10m
paved patch next to the normal lane.
In Sweden they have a lot of 2+1 roads and they seem to become
popular with planners in Germany, too
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2%2B1_road). Basically, it's a
permanently alternating long turnout. :-) I would be overshooting to
explicitly mark every two lane bit as a turnout or passing lane.
I favor the idea of marking turnouts, passing lanes and 2+1 roads all
the same by using the lanes tagging scheme. For explicit (short)
turnouts we might want to create a new value for turn:lanes=pass or
something like that.
Tobi
Am 05.09.2018 um 03:13 schrieb Dave Swarthout:
@Warin, Thanks for clearing up my confusion about passing places.
These turnouts are definitely not the same. A vehicle should never
stop in one. They are about 1/4 mile long and some but not all have
painted lines to separate the highway proper from the turnout lanes.
In the U.S., where we drive on the right, such lanes are always on
the right-hand side of the highway, and although they aren't signed
as one way, it's sensible to include that tag IMO. In practice, a
slow-moving vehicle turns off the main highway, slows down enough to
allow following vehicles time to pass on the left, after which it
returns to the main highway.
Given that the passing_place tag defines the situation you describe,
and indeed was created to model it, I'm not sure modifying its
definition to include ways would be a good idea. In addition, the
term "passing" or, in the EU, "overtaking", implies that the passing
vehicle does so on the left (U.S.) while these turnouts are always
on the right. Hence my reluctance to redefine that tag.
Dave
On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 6:55 PM Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com
<mailto:61sundow...@gmail.com>> wrote:
On 04/09/18 21:04, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
2018-09-04 12:42 GMT+02:00 Dave Swarthout
<daveswarth...@gmail.com <mailto:daveswarth...@gmail.com>>:
Summarizing recent comments:
Martin wrote:
> what’s wrong with passing place? Seems to describe the same thing
I thought so too until I noticed that the Wiki says
passing_place is used for nodes only, using logic that
escapes me, so I began searching for another method. I also
considered modifying that definition so it includes ways
but was reluctant to start that battle even though that
still seems a good solution.
I would be in favor of adding the possibility to tag
highway=passing_place on ways, there is already a tiny fraction
tagged on ways (although the percentage currently makes it
clear they are outliers). There's a general problem with using
nodes for features like these: they don't have a direction, so
you can't state where the widening takes place.
Passing places are not long.
Most of them are just long enough to squeeze in a car and
caravan ... just.
You are supposed to come to a complete stop to let others pass
in either direction.
They are usually on single lane, two way roads.
So a passing place .. you have to stop in it. You cannot keep
moving as you would with any distance of extra lane.
For the lanes approach: I would only use this if the place has
some length (more than 5-10 meters you may typically find on a
track) AND if there are lane markings (general requirement for
lanes).
Cheers,
Martin
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org <mailto:Tagging@openstreetmap.org>
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org <mailto:Tagging@openstreetmap.org>
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
--
Dave Swarthout
Homer, Alaska
Chiang Mai, Thailand
Travel Blog at http://dswarthout.blogspot.com
_______________________________________________
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
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
