On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 5:10 PM, Shaun McDonald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > On 28 Nov 2008, at 13:16, Martin Norbäck wrote: > >> Hi everybody, >> I'm sure this has been discussed in length before, but I cannot seem >> to find a good way to search the archives. Anyway, I will present my >> thoughts here and you can respond or be quiet :) >> >> I'm trying to fix at least two issues I have. >> >> a) A way that is sort of one-way but allows buses and taxis in the >> opposite direction. >> >> Don't know how to tag them, currently I've just ignored buses and >> taxis and tagged them oneway=yes. > > It might be easier to use 2 parallel ways for this. It wouldn't surprise me > if in a years time every [major] road has a way for each direction that you > can travel on it.
It might be easier but it sure is not correct. There is only one street. One lane. It's just that it is oneway for cars, but not for psvs. >> b) 2+1 ways as we call them in Sweden, they are normal ways but have a >> small fence in the middle and 2 lanes on one side and 1 lane on the >> other side. They look like this: >> http://www.vv.se/filer/Vägprojekt/3-Falt.jpg > > I would say that these should be done the same way as motorways, with 2 > parallel one way roads. The appropriate number of lanes can be added for > each direction. I understand that I can map them as two roads, but physically they are one road. So I'm thinking, why map them as two roads, when they are one. Motorways are different, they consist of two separated pieces of way. They have ramps and acceleration fields. This would be a case of mapping both for how the road actually looks and for the renderer. It could render the way better if it knows that it's a three lane road with two lanes in one direction and one in the other with a fence in the middle. >> The advantage of having a simple tagging mechanism like this is that >> the editors can easily prevent accidental reversal of a way, like josm >> does right now with oneway. There are probably other uses for this >> kind of scheme. And it doesn't really fit into a relation either. > > JOSM will already allow the reversal of tags that are direction specific. I think that was what I was saying above, yes. So it should be easy to extend it to handle the forward:/backward: prefix. /Martin _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
