On 17.10.2012 09:31, Martin Vonwald wrote: > Obviously we need some kind of tagging for lane dividers. Initially > when writing the :lanes proposal I though about reusing the divider > proposal: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Divider > > But this has one serious drawback: if you have a road with four lanes > you would tag e.g. turn:lanes=left|through|through|right . That's four > lane-values. But if you want to tag the dividers you would need > divider:lanes=solid_line|dots|solid_lane . That's three lane-values. > In my opinion that's not a good idea - I would like to have the same > number of lane-values for all keys.
This problem does indeed exist, but it only appears with oneway roads because no obvious definition exists what the plain "divider" key means in that case. With two-way roads, directly applying the divider proposal could work quite well: You have divider=* for the central divider between the directions - that option should be kept anyway because often the other dividers are much less interesting. Then divider:lanes:forward/backward refer to the "outer" divider for each lane. > Now (a time ago) I came up with something different: have a look at > part 3 of the first example: > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Imagic/LaneMapping * > > Please keep in mind that's just a first idea! What do you think? That is a very different approach from the divider tag. It amounts to tagging one of the effects of the divider, rather than the divider itself, so there is a lot of information missing. I don't really see how the above argument about the number of values leads to that completely different solution. Tobias _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
