It's a recentish (late 90s/early 2000s) update to the MUTCD, before that you would be correct (and usually as a stopgap between striping, places where this is still the case is highlighted by signage, but this is getting to be rare as most plsces have had long enough to require a repaint if not a repave since then).
On Mon, Sep 10, 2018, 14:36 SelfishSeahorse <[email protected]> wrote: > I wasn't aware that it is allowed to cross a single solid line in the > USA. Hence forget the overtaking:lanes:<forward/backward>=* tags in > the example in my last message. > On Mon, 10 Sep 2018 at 20:38, Paul Johnson <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > I see it as a variation on no turn on red/turn after stop OK on red > dichotomy. Not really significant enough to bring up in the map data > specifically, so long as the signal itself is mapped. And the single white > line seems to not be of special significance in most cases, only meaning > that you need to use additional caution when changing lanes (as opposed to > double white lines, where lane changes in one or both directions is > prohibited). > > > > On Mon, Sep 10, 2018, 13:29 Tobias Wrede <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> The solid line is a special case. So many other turn-outs/climbing > lanes/... have a dashed line or even no line at all. I wouldn't make a > difference based on markings. > >> > >> I also strongly favor the lines solution but wonder if we could not > stretch the turn key a bit. Something along > turn:lanes:forward=through|turn-out. > >> > >> /Tobi > >> > >> > >> Am 10.09.2018 um 19:54 schrieb Paul Johnson: > >> > >> I don't think so. Really the only thing throwing this off seems to be > the same thing throwing off people who think bus and bicycle lanes > shouldn't be counted as lanes: the solid line. > >> > >> On Mon, Sep 10, 2018, 11:50 Kevin Kenny <[email protected]> > wrote: > >>> > >>> It seems to me that the key attribute of the 'climbing lane' situation > >>> that Dave mentions is that it's an additional lane. It's provided for > >>> slow-moving vehicles, sure, but that's really a special case of the > >>> near-universal convention that slow-moving traffic gives way to > >>> overtaking traffic by moving to the outside (that is, in North > >>> America, to the right). The difference, at least where I am, between a > >>> climbing lane and another ordinary lane is a subtle one: you don't > >>> have to move to the outside if nobody's trying to overtake, rather > >>> than a "keep right except to pass" rule. You get 90% of the way there > >>> by simply having the correct number of lanes:forward and > >>> lanes:backward. Is adding a lane that much more complicated than > >>> drawing a parallel way? > >>> On Mon, Sep 10, 2018 at 11:31 AM Joseph Eisenberg > >>> <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> > > >>> > I'd say that it would be better to leave them unmapped than to > incorrectly map them as separate service roads. > >>> > If they are only divided by a single painted line, they are just > lanes, not a separate roadway. > >>> > And it's not too difficult to split the way twice and paste on a > couple of tags > >>> > > >>> > On Mon, Sep 10, 2018 at 10:17 PM Dave Swarthout < > [email protected]> wrote: > >>> >> > >>> >> Wow, thanks for the help, Markus. I really appreciate it. > >>> >> > >>> >> But I must say, if I have to use that method to tag all the > turnouts on the Sterling Highway, I'm going to leave them unmapped. Life is > too short and there is a lot of other mapping yet to do in Alaska. > >>> >> > >>> >> Although these lanes are not physically separated by a barrier > other than a painted line, I'm going to opt for the service road scenario. > It is simple, much, much less error prone to map, and IMHO, would do the > job better than the lanes technique. > >>> >> > >>> >> Thanks to all, > >>> >> > >>> >> Dave > >>> >> > >>> >> On Mon, Sep 10, 2018 at 6:51 PM SelfishSeahorse < > [email protected]> wrote: > >>> >>> > >>> >>> On Mon, 10 Sep 2018 at 11:17, Dave Swarthout < > [email protected]> wrote: > >>> >>> > I'm still not convinced the lanes:smv tagging scenario is the > best solution but were I to change my mind, how would I tag my turnouts? > Here is another screen shot of the particular section of highway with a > turnout on both sides of the road that I've been discussing (59.752103, > -151.766395 ) with the ways removed for clarity: > https://www.dropbox.com/s/nm6iahw9ch79tuh/slow_vehicle_turnout.jpg?dl=0 > >>> >>> > >>> >>> I would probably split the road at every place where an additional > >>> >>> lane begins or ends, i.e. four times, and would tag the sections as > >>> >>> follows from right to left (this is the direction of the highway > way): > >>> >>> > >>> >>> lanes=2 > >>> >>> > >>> >>> lanes=3 > >>> >>> lanes:forward=2 > >>> >>> lanes:backward=1 > >>> >>> smv:lanes:forward=|designated > >>> >>> overtaking:lanes:forward=yes|no > >>> >>> > >>> >>> lanes=4 > >>> >>> lanes:forward=2 > >>> >>> lanes:backward=2 > >>> >>> smv:lanes:forward=|designated > >>> >>> smv:lanes:backward=|designated > >>> >>> overtaking:lanes:forward=yes|no > >>> >>> overtaking:lanes:backward=yes|no > >>> >>> > >>> >>> lanes=3 > >>> >>> lanes:forward=1 > >>> >>> lanes:backward=2 > >>> >>> smv:lanes:backward=|designated > >>> >>> overtaking:lanes:backward=yes|no > >>> >>> > >>> >>> lanes=2 > >>> >>> > >>> >>> In case the turnouts were separated by a barrier, i think your idea > >>> >>> with highway=service + service=slow_vehicle_turnout would make > sense. > >>> >>> > >>> >>> Regards > >>> >>> Markus > >>> >> > >>> >> > >>> >> > >>> >> -- > >>> >> Dave Swarthout > >>> >> Homer, Alaska > >>> >> Chiang Mai, Thailand > >>> >> Travel Blog at http://dswarthout.blogspot.com > >>> >> _______________________________________________ > >>> >> Tagging mailing list > >>> >> [email protected] > >>> >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > >>> > > >>> > _______________________________________________ > >>> > Tagging mailing list > >>> > [email protected] > >>> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> Tagging mailing list > >>> [email protected] > >>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Tagging mailing list > >> [email protected] > >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Tagging mailing list > >> [email protected] > >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Tagging mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
