On Sat, Dec 12, 2020 at 11:22 AM Jan Michel <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 12.12.20 17:47, Paul Johnson wrote: > > On Sat, Dec 12, 2020 at 10:46 AM Jan Michel > > <[email protected] > > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > > > On 12.12.20 17:25, Paul Johnson wrote: > > > > > Sure, if you manually torque tag it to match the incorrect > > > documentation. As soon as you open the lane editor, it rightly > > corrects > > > it to lanes=5, since you have 2 lanes in one way and 3 in the > other. > > > > The "incorrect documentation" was voted on and it was approved. > > > > > > I'm pretty sure it was done without consideration for reserved lanes as > > lane access tagging wasn't something yet available. Now it is, and it's > > time to reconsider that. > > I'm refering to the proposal of exactly this: the :lanes extension. It > was clearly and unambiguously taken into account: > > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/lanes_General_Extension#The_issues_with_the_lanes_tag That specific anchor says it's completely sidestepping the issue while highlighting the shortcoming of lanes=* as it stands now. We need to fix lanes=* to mean all lanes. This isn't a hard change to make, but it is a necessary one to disambiguate lane tagging. Which means any lane editor that sees the turn:lanes or access:lanes tag is going to count that and go "OK, there's at least this many lanes" and fix the count.
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
