On Thu, 24 Oct 2019 at 13:30, Paul Johnson <ba...@ursamundi.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 7:20 AM Paul Allen <pla16...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> Necessary, but not sufficient. It doesn't just have to be physically >> treaversable, it has >> to be legally traversable. >> > > Eeeh, I think that's a bit of a grey area, like stopping on yellow lights. > Yes, but there are rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty (at least in the UK): "All vehicles MUST pass round the central markings except large vehicles which are physically incapable of doing so." UK mini roundabouts are signed as such, so while there may be doubt and uncertainty about how large the vehicle is and the necessity of going straight across, there's no doubt whether it is a mini roundabout or not. Does the example roundabout have signage defining the central island as legally traversable? Does the unbroken white line around it indicate vehicles may not cross it? What do the traffic regulations say about roundabouts in general? Is this a real roundabout built on the cheap and the island happens to be physically traversable but not legally so or do the regulations say "If you can physically drive across a roundabout then you may do so if your vehicle is too large to go around"? That particular example is tough to decide just from imagery. It's a fairly tight circle. But those split lanes make me shudder when I think of vehicles going straight across. I'd hate to map it as a mini roundabout if legally it isn't and then some router happily tells a driver to drive straight across; or to map it as a roundabout when legally it isn't and the router tells the driver to do a 360. There might be legal consequences if OSM adopts a cavalier attitude to these things. Traffic regulations are even more important than physical appearances. -- Paul
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
