On Sun, Sep 20, 2009 at 10:04 AM, John Smith <[email protected]>wrote:
> 2009/9/20 Anthony <[email protected]>: > > > Yes they are. If they weren't physically separated, people would be > driving > > on top of each other. If they weren't physically separated, they > wouldn't > > be called multiple lanes - they'd be called one lane. > > Pretty sure I left an "if" out, if the lanes are on top of the same > physical thing, in this case a bridge it's a single way, just the > lanes need tagging differently. > So this is a single way? http://bikelaneblog.files.wordpress.com/2008/02/pulaski-bridge-walkway.jpg?w=324&h=241 That's nutty. > > The maxspeed of a way is the maximum speed you can legally travel on that > > way. There's nothing inaccurate about tagging the way with the maximum > > speed you can legally travel on it. > > That isn't accurate, the maximum speed varies by lane. Instead of > maxspeed, what about maxheight, if several lanes have different > maxheights it would be inaccurate and incorrect to mark either the > highest or lowest maxheight since you might fit if you get in the > right lane. > As long as you are free to change lanes, I disagree. The maxheight of a way is the maximum height of the way. Using a GPS doesn't permit you to ignore signs which say to stay out of the right lane. Now if there's routing information involved - if you can't switch lanes - then yes, this is important information. But it's also the place for more than one way. > > Everything in the world is physically connected. In this case, let's > leave > > out the cycle lane and footpath and just consider a dual carriage way > (with > > central reservation). There are two roads and an island which go over > one > > bridge. One way, two, or three? > > Is it one bridge or 2 bridges, if it's one bridge it's a single way > with multiple lanes. > Have you ever been on a bridge with a Jersey barrier? Is that one bridge, or two? > > One way is unacceptable. If that's your proposal, it is to rewrite all > the > > editors and all the routing software, and then go through the database > > combining all the dual carriageways which many of us worked hard to split > up > > in the first place. > > You really need to read my comments instead of making assumptions, > dual carriage ways usually aren't phycially connected, not in the same > respect as a bridge. > Searching Google for "physically separated", I have some examples. Are any of these examples of a single way? http://www.flickr.com/photos/portlandtransport/3877499480/sizes/m/in/set-72157622203417368/ http://www.uppergreenside.org/wp-content/uploads/2007/03/physically-separated-bike-lanes-diagram.jpg http://bikelaneblog.files.wordpress.com/2008/03/9th-ave-with-platic-barriers.jpg http://bikelaneblog.files.wordpress.com/2008/02/pulaski-bridge-walkway.jpg?w=324&h=241 http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_kvgPyMB-iIs/SWkOfoVQVEI/AAAAAAAADbA/3lCHczbQ700/s320/pinest_physical_bike-1.jpg http://www.streetsblog.org/wp-content/uploads/moved/buffered_bike_lane4.jpg http://www.transitmiami.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/Miami-Bicycle-Survey-384-1024x768.jpg http://i.treehugger.com/images/2007/10/24/new%20york%20bike%20lane.jpg http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2399/2367382978_f878d69045.jpg Maybe the last one. Anything else, is "physically separated", but could easily be accomplished over a single bridge (one of them even *is* an example of a single bridge).
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
