Re: [Tagging] How to tag: Legally separated ways (2nd Part)

I've uploaded my example to this page: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Lane_assist I would also like to add a link to this page from the motorway_link page, since lane assist will be supported: Mapfactor has started working on it. Any comments are still welcome! 2012/11/9 Johan C > After r

Re: [Tagging] How to tag: Legally separated ways (2nd Part)

After reading the several posts I have made a simplified example on the tagging of a motorway exit. I would like to receive your comments on it. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:It's_so_funny Cheers, Johan 2012/10/18 Alberto > >Just to be clear: I agree with Martin Koppenhoefer on spli

Re: [Tagging] How to tag: Legally separated ways (2nd Part)

I today got the following response by joedalton85 (tags a lot of motorways in France): pour ma part, je prefere mettre les _link dés qu'elle commence ou finnissent pour plusieurs raisons. - Ca permet d'avoir une longueur de voirie plus proche de la réalité - Ca permet d'avoir une occupation

Re: [Tagging] How to tag: Legally separated ways (2nd Part)

On Oct 17, 2012 5:35 PM, "Johan C" wrote: > > good thing to have this discussion. Too often I've seen OSM discussions end up in 'everything is possible' which in the long run will prevent OSM to ever grow-up and eventually become competitive to the commercial boys and girls. (why the f... are mill

Re: [Tagging] How to tag: Legally separated ways (2nd Part)

>Just to be clear: I agree with Martin Koppenhoefer on splitting the ways only if there is a physical division. However, for the sake of geometry, I prefer to anticipate the split a bit, >which is why I would put the split in section 5 or maybe even earlier - the actual position depends on how long

Re: [Tagging] How to tag: Legally separated ways (2nd Part)

good thing to have this discussion. Too often I've seen OSM discussions end up in 'everything is possible' which in the long run will prevent OSM to ever grow-up and eventually become competitive to the commercial boys and girls. (why the f... are millions of Android users using G.. maps and not OS

Re: [Tagging] How to tag: Legally separated ways (2nd Part)

On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 2:06 AM, Martin Vonwald wrote: > Hi (again)! > > Thanks for all the answers. I would like to ask three more (the last > one for this week - promised!): > > Same image as before: > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Lanes_Example_2.png > > Now consider part 4 to 6. At w

Re: [Tagging] How to tag: Legally separated ways (2nd Part)

2012/10/17 Martin Koppenhoefer > 2012/10/17 Martin Vonwald : > > Same image as before: > > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Lanes_Example_2.png > > > > Now consider part 4 to 6. At what point would you split the way coming > > from part 4? > > a) Before the end of part 4 > > b) At the end

Re: [Tagging] How to tag: Legally separated ways (2nd Part)

2012/10/17 Martin Koppenhoefer : >> Now consider part 4 to 6. At what point would you split the way coming >> from part 4? >> a) Before the end of part 4 >> b) At the end of part 4/start of part 5 >> c) In the middle of part 5 >> d) At the end of part 5/start of part 6 >> e) Tell me! > > > d) > isn

Re: [Tagging] How to tag: Legally separated ways (2nd Part)

2012/10/17 Martin Vonwald > Hi (again)! > > Thanks for all the answers. I would like to ask three more (the last > one for this week - promised!): > > Same image as before: > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Lanes_Example_2.png > > Now consider part 4 to 6. At what point would you split th

Re: [Tagging] How to tag: Legally separated ways (2nd Part)

2012/10/17 Martin Vonwald : > Same image as before: > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Lanes_Example_2.png > > Now consider part 4 to 6. At what point would you split the way coming > from part 4? > a) Before the end of part 4 > b) At the end of part 4/start of part 5 > c) In the middle of p

Re: [Tagging] How to tag: Legally separated ways

2012/10/17 Kytömaa Lauri > >Only part 5 is relevant. > Having just returned from my (mapping) trip, and having finally > browsed through all these messages on this subjet, I don't think > anybody mentioned it explicitly: You can't consider only part 5. I think he means that, for lack of a bette

Re: [Tagging] How to tag: Legally separated ways

>Only part 5 is relevant. Having just returned from my (mapping) trip, and having finally browsed through all these messages on this subjet, I don't think anybody mentioned it explicitly: You can't consider only part 5. At part 6, the ways are physically separated, so IMO there should be two s

Re: [Tagging] How to tag: Legally separated ways (2nd Part)

Hi (again)! Thanks for all the answers. I would like to ask three more (the last one for this week - promised!): Same image as before: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Lanes_Example_2.png Now consider part 4 to 6. At what point would you split the way coming from part 4? a) Before the end

Re: [Tagging] How to tag: Legally separated ways

On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 9:28 PM, John F. Eldredge wrote: > The emergency vehicles in the USA are also allowed to disobey traffic laws > in an emergency. They have to have the flashing lights and siren on, and > take precautions to watch out for regular traffic. For example, a police > car, fire

Re: [Tagging] How to tag: Legally separated ways

"Eckhart Wörner" wrote: > Hi Svavar, > > Am Montag, 15. Oktober 2012, 18:26:02 schrieb Svavar Kjarrval: > > I think most laws require that even emergency vehicles observe > > restrictions like oneway streets. If there are any restrictions > which > > can be broken in case of emergency vehicles,

Re: [Tagging] How to tag: Legally separated ways

Am 17.10.2012 00:18, schrieb Anthony: > On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 9:30 AM, Tobias Knerr wrote: >> On 16.10.2012 01:07, Anthony wrote: >>> As long as you have width information on the ways, I don't see the >>> problem. The amount of physical separation, whether it be an inch >>> between two lines, o

Re: [Tagging] How to tag: Legally separated ways

2012/10/16 Chris Hill : > Perhaps in your part of the world, but not everywhere. Crossing solid lines, > as centrelines or lane separators have exceptions for ordinary vehicles (not > just emergency vehicles) here. Yet another example of how local influences > must be applied to documentation. The

Re: [Tagging] How to tag: Legally separated ways

On 16.10.2012 01:07, Anthony wrote: > On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 5:23 PM, Tobias Knerr wrote: >> realistic rendering, particularly 3D "virtual reality". >> Physical separation and road markings look quite different from each >> other and should therefore also look different in that kind of rendering

Re: [Tagging] How to tag: Legally separated ways

On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 12:42 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > 2012/10/16 Janko Mihelić : >> You have to divide the road each time there is not a full line on the road, >> ad you should put a restriction where those roads meet that restricts >> U-turns. What is the answer to that? > > > I find it

Re: [Tagging] How to tag: Legally separated ways

On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 1:27 PM, Chris Hill wrote: > Maybe we should try to map the physical characteristics and leave > the legal interpretation to the drivers who are required to interpret what > they see on the ground before them and cannot rely on any map or database > for legal guidance. It'

Re: [Tagging] How to tag: Legally separated ways

On 16/10/12 11:48, Simone Saviolo wrote: 2012/10/16 Colin Smale > There's maybe a difference between the case of two lanes in the same direction, and two lanes in opposite directions. There's none. If a solid line is painted between lanes going in opposite

Re: [Tagging] How to tag: Legally separated ways

2012/10/16 Colin Smale > Are you seriously suggesting that emergency services will trust a satnav > in preference to their own eyes and brains? > I hope not, and I hope this is true for everyone and not only for emergency vehicle drivers. However, not all places are within eye distance. An ambu

Re: [Tagging] How to tag: Legally separated ways

2012/10/16 Colin Smale > There's maybe a difference between the case of two lanes in the same > direction, and two lanes in opposite directions. > There's none. If a solid line is painted between lanes going in opposite directions, it's legally impossible to cross the line. If a solid line is p

Re: [Tagging] How to tag: Legally separated ways

2012/10/16 Janko Mihelić : > I posted this picture the last time this came up. It shows that dividing > roads is silly in some situations, for example countryside roads: > > http://i.imgur.com/p5Oto.png > > You have to divide the road each time there is not a full line on the road, > ad you should

Re: [Tagging] How to tag: Legally separated ways

There's maybe a difference between the case of two lanes in the same direction, and two lanes in opposite directions. On 16/10/2012 11:44, Janko Mihelic' wrote: I posted this picture the last time this came up. It shows that dividing roads is silly in some situations, for example countryside ro

Re: [Tagging] How to tag: Legally separated ways

Are you seriously suggesting that emergency services will trust a satnav in preference to their own eyes and brains? Especially a satnav driven by data with no proactive quality control and no-one you can sue/complain to? And seriously incomplete data? I think you are looking at a multi-year pr

Re: [Tagging] How to tag: Legally separated ways

I posted this picture the last time this came up. It shows that dividing roads is silly in some situations, for example countryside roads: http://i.imgur.com/p5Oto.png You have to divide the road each time there is not a full line on the road, ad you should put a restriction where those roads mee

Re: [Tagging] How to tag: Legally separated ways

2012/10/16 Martin Koppenhöfer > > > Am 16/ott/2012 um 11:28 schrieb Markus Lindholm >: > > > To be able to do proper routing for emergency vehicles perhaps it > > would be a good idea to introduce something like landuse=highway that > > would denote an area suitable for motor vehicles and that i

Re: [Tagging] How to tag: Legally separated ways

Am 16/ott/2012 um 11:28 schrieb Markus Lindholm : > To be able to do proper routing for emergency vehicles perhaps it > would be a good idea to introduce something like landuse=highway that > would denote an area suitable for motor vehicles and that is free of > physical obstacles. There is a

Re: [Tagging] How to tag: Legally separated ways

On 15 October 2012 20:08, Colin Smale wrote: > I don't understand why emergency vehicles are so important in this > discussion. In the first place they have wide-ranging exemptions from > traffic rules, which (let's be honest) we are never going to tag in OSM. > Secondly they are never going to be

Re: [Tagging] How to tag: Legally separated ways

2012/10/15 Philip Barnes > The law varies from country to country. In the UK, it is legal to cross > a solid white line to turn into a side road, or driveway. You can also > cross one to overtake a slow moving vehicle, such as a cyclist or > tractor. > > In France, where it is illegal to cross a

Re: [Tagging] How to tag: Legally separated ways

2012/10/15 Colin Smale > I don't understand why emergency vehicles are so important in this > discussion. Because OSM publicly advertises the fact that its maps are being used in the Gaza's strip by emergency vehicles that would otherwise have no map? Just to name one. Also because emergency ve

Re: [Tagging] How to tag: Legally separated ways

2012/10/16 Paul Johnson > I'd go with option b. Despite being a single way, you're committed to > taking the ramp by that point (due to the double-white solid lines), making > it functionally an extension of the ramp. The OP explicitly asks you to focus on section 5 alone, NOT on section 5 as

Re: [Tagging] How to tag: Legally separated ways

2012/10/15 Johan C > I think there's some confusion here. Imagic's question was on a motorway > example. Where did you get this from? Sure, he referred to a picture with the model of a motorway, but he esplicitly said "consider only section 5". We're not talking about that section 5 *on a motor

Re: [Tagging] How to tag: Legally separated ways

I'd go with option b. Despite being a single way, you're committed to taking the ramp by that point (due to the double-white solid lines), making it functionally an extension of the ramp. On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 3:56 AM, Martin Vonwald wrote: > Hi! > > Some kind of short how-would-you-tag-this-s

Re: [Tagging] How to tag: Legally separated ways

Tobias wrote: > > I would choose (a) [One way with lanes=4] and reserve separate ways for > _actual_ physical separation. +1. Agree, different reasoning. Paint is not asphalt. (Maybe this legal separation should be like a turn restriction.) Early notification of coming turn is build into GPS s

Re: [Tagging] How to tag: Legally separated ways

Please read carefully: one thing is a legal barrier (e.g. continuous line), one thing is a real barrier (e.g. guard rail, Jersey barrier). A legal barrier can be crossed by a vehicle if necessary, a real barrier not. We don't need to tag any exception for emergency vehicles. The routing software (n

Re: [Tagging] How to tag: Legally separated ways

On 15.10.2012 20:08, Colin Smale wrote: > I don't understand why emergency vehicles are so important in this > discussion. They are often allowed to ignore legal restrictions, but cannot generally ignore physical restrictions, so it's an obvious example where this distinction matters. But before

Re: [Tagging] How to tag: Legally separated ways

I think there's some confusion here. Imagic's question was on a motorway example. Three things on this. 1. I've noticed these OSM'ers in favour of option a: Junker, Tobias K., Martin, Simone, Alberto and Eckhart. Could any of these OSM'ers please put an example (older than today [?]) of this tagg

Re: [Tagging] How to tag: Legally separated ways

Then it could be easy for them to tailor those requirements to ignore restrictions into the routing software. - Svavar Kjarrval On 15/10/12 18:45, Colin Smale wrote: > Not in the UK or the Netherlands at least. They can do whatever they > see fit in the course of duty, especially with lights and

Re: [Tagging] How to tag: Legally separated ways

The law varies from country to country. In the UK, it is legal to cross a solid white line to turn into a side road, or driveway. You can also cross one to overtake a slow moving vehicle, such as a cyclist or tractor. In France, where it is illegal to cross a solid line even to enter a driveway. I

Re: [Tagging] How to tag: Legally separated ways

Hi Svavar, Am Montag, 15. Oktober 2012, 18:26:02 schrieb Svavar Kjarrval: > I think most laws require that even emergency vehicles observe > restrictions like oneway streets. If there are any restrictions which > can be broken in case of emergency vehicles, I think they'd program > their routing s

Re: [Tagging] How to tag: Legally separated ways

Not in the UK or the Netherlands at least. They can do whatever they see fit in the course of duty, especially with lights and sirens. Of course they can be called to account if anything goes wrong. But a policeman chasing a criminal who turns the wrong way up a one way street is going to follo

Re: [Tagging] How to tag: Legally separated ways

I think most laws require that even emergency vehicles observe restrictions like oneway streets. If there are any restrictions which can be broken in case of emergency vehicles, I think they'd program their routing software to them. - Svavar Kjarrval On 15/10/12 18:16, Eckhart Wörner wrote: > Hi

Re: [Tagging] How to tag: Legally separated ways

Hi Colin, Am Montag, 15. Oktober 2012, 20:08:01 schrieb Colin Smale: > I don't understand why emergency vehicles are so important in this > discussion. In the first place they have wide-ranging exemptions from > traffic rules, which (let's be honest) we are never going to tag in OSM. > Secondly

Re: [Tagging] How to tag: Legally separated ways

I don't understand why emergency vehicles are so important in this discussion. In the first place they have wide-ranging exemptions from traffic rules, which (let's be honest) we are never going to tag in OSM. Secondly they are never going to be relying on OSM data (or indeed any normal sat-nav

Re: [Tagging] How to tag: Legally separated ways

> > a) One way with lanes=4 > > b) Two separate ways with lanes=2 each > > c) Tell me! a) because distinction between physical and legal barriers is important. Ok in that picture there is no much difference, but as Simone pointed out, for long roads there is a big difference: if any router can't d

Re: [Tagging] How to tag: Legally separated ways

>I created a new picture very much based on the old one. Just made the road gray to try to make it more clearer? >http://minkarta.no-ip.org/Lanes_Example_2.svg >Im not sure how to upload it so if anyone thinks this is better please do, otherwise I atleast learned a little what I can do in inkscape

Re: [Tagging] How to tag: Legally separated ways

Am 15.10.2012 um 17:55 schrieb Markus Lindholm : > But as I'm sure you've noticed there's some divided opinion about this. That's why I asked! Actually I don't think that we see any consensus about this soon. But then I can document at least that there are two variants under discussion. If I c

Re: [Tagging] How to tag: Legally separated ways

On 15 October 2012 10:56, Martin Vonwald wrote: > Hi! > > Some kind of short how-would-you-tag-this-survey. Have a look at part > five of this motorway: > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Lanes_Example_2.png > > Only part 5 is relevant. Assume there is no physical separation just a > double

Re: [Tagging] How to tag: Legally separated ways

I created a new picture very much based on the old one. Just made the road gray to try to make it more clearer? http://minkarta.no-ip.org/Lanes_Example_2.svg Im not sure how to upload it so if anyone thinks this is better please do, otherwise I atleast learned a little what I can do in inkscape :

Re: [Tagging] How to tag: Legally separated ways

2012/10/15 Tobias Knerr > On 15.10.2012 10:56, Martin Vonwald wrote: > > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Lanes_Example_2.png > > > > Only part 5 is relevant. Assume there is no physical separation just a > > double line between the upper and lower two lanes. How would you tag > > this: >

Re: [Tagging] How to tag: Legally separated ways

I use b. Because thats the only way I was/am aware of to tag whats on the ground. A divider. But yes I would like there to be an easy way to tag it in the same way.. I even think there should be a possibility to tag a physical divider in the same way, because some roads with physical dividers real

Re: [Tagging] How to tag: Legally separated ways

2012/10/15 Tobias Knerr : > I would choose (a) and reserve separate ways for _actual_ physical > separation. > > One practical reason for doing so is that there would simply be no > possibility to distinguish legally separate ways from physically > separate ways if we used the same mapping (splitti

Re: [Tagging] How to tag: Legally separated ways

On 15.10.2012 10:56, Martin Vonwald wrote: > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Lanes_Example_2.png > > Only part 5 is relevant. Assume there is no physical separation just a > double line between the upper and lower two lanes. How would you tag > this: > a) One way with lanes=4 > b) Two sepa

Re: [Tagging] How to tag: Legally separated ways

On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 11:27 AM, Martin Vonwald wrote: > Sorry, you are wrong - I drew the image ;-) But because the image is > not 100% clear I added a note in the related article and now I have to > make sure the note is correct and clear. Your image and note are not really helping. The figur

Re: [Tagging] How to tag: Legally separated ways

One way with lanes=4. If firemen ever want to use osm, i want them to have good data. Janko ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] How to tag: Legally separated ways

2012/10/15 Colin Smale : > I am not sure I would interpret the diagram in that way though; the fact > that there are no arrows on the road from part 5 onwards suggests to me that > there is no chance of changing your mind. There is no chance of (legally) changing your mind, because there are doubl

Re: [Tagging] How to tag: Legally separated ways

I would opt for (b) even though I know that this is not the "offcial" way of tagging. The reason: In section (4) the driver can still change lanes, at least on the middle lanes, whereas in section (5) he cannot (legally) change lanes any more between the middle lanes. This example clearly illustr

Re: [Tagging] How to tag: Legally separated ways

I would choose option b). Even if all four lanes are one piece of carriageway, it is useful for routing directions etc to be able to make a distinction between the left and right parts of the road. Normal mortals are supposed to treat the solid white lines as if they were a brick wall anyway,

[Tagging] How to tag: Legally separated ways

Hi! Some kind of short how-would-you-tag-this-survey. Have a look at part five of this motorway: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Lanes_Example_2.png Only part 5 is relevant. Assume there is no physical separation just a double line between the upper and lower two lanes. How would you tag