if lanes is about the total amount of marked "2-tracked-vehicle"-lanes (as it is according to my understanding), then lanes=0 means no marked lanes.
No simply because 2 lanes = opposites 1 forward 1 backward marked or not. This a routing comportement. You can have 2 lanes but no mark on road. This is the case in rural France road. Legaly, absence of marking is permit and you need fix right position on road. https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/bPYmBV9vGQr2CxoSIKGfRw this is 2 lanes departmental road. In fact in some routing tools if there is no lane there is no road. A lane is not in relation to road marking. Same remark as Paul Le mar. 30 juil. 2019 à 13:33, Paul Allen <[email protected]> a écrit : > On Tue, 30 Jul 2019 at 12:21, Martin Koppenhoefer <[email protected]> > wrote: > > if lanes is about the total amount of marked "2-tracked-vehicle"-lanes (as >> it is according to my understanding), then lanes=0 means no marked lanes. >> > > That's logical but not particularly useful. Around here there are a lot > of minor roads. Some of > them are only wide enough for one vehicle, so are unmarked. By your logic > that's lanes=0. > Some of them are wide enough for two vehicles, but still unmarked. By > your logic that's > also lanes=0. For many of us, it's nice to know if an unmarked road is > only wide enough > for one vehicle (so you might have to back up to a passing place one or > more times) or > wide enough for two vehicles. The presence or absence of marking can > really only be > used to infer the presence or absence of marking and nothing more. > > -- > Paul > > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > -- Cordialement, Jérôme Seigneuret
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
