For the first problem I have often used an approximate approach, in the sense that if there were two different-level "give-ways" I would put the more severe one, i.e. the stop. In other cases I have created two ways taking the painted divider as a real one. For the second problem, I have simply ignored it.
I agree all three are not satisfactory. The relation solution seems to be correct approach to me, even though it is little-used. There are 59 stop or give-way relations in the US, but 57 of them are in the same city. But there are >1392 relations with restriction:bicycle=give_way in France and the Relation restriction Wiki page <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:restriction> lists it. They ave popped into existence with the turn-right-on-red for bikes regulation, which is spreading in Europe. So it would be a small extrapolation from there to having generic stop and give-way restriction relations. On Sat, 2 May 2020 at 22:29, Jarek Piórkowski <ja...@piorkowski.ca> wrote: > On Sat, 2 May 2020 at 16:21, António Madeira <antoniomade...@gmx.com> > wrote: > > I'm not very knowledgable about relations, and I'm sorry if I'm a bit > confused here, but doesn't a restriction relation means the exact opposite > of what's intended here? > > I mean, I want to apply a STOP sign to a given lane (in a way with two > lanes, for example) and force its action to a given direction on the new > road ahead. > > IMO, a relation helps here because you can define the route which the > rule applies to - it only applies going "from" a certain way and "to" > a certain way, and specifically applies at a given "position". > > Then it is just a matter of choosing what type of relation works best, > or creating a new type. > > > If neither relation scheme (enforcement or restriction) can be applied > here (for complexity or incompatibility reasons), why not use the existing > lanes scheme? > > Like this: > > > > highway=stop > > stop:lanes=yes|no > > stop:turn:lanes=left > > Personally I've always seen highway=stop on a node, and I'm not sure > :lanes tagging makes sense on a node (a point doesn't have lanes). > You'd definitely need to add at least direction=forward/backward if > tagging a node. But I wouldn't be opposed to that scheme in general. > > --Jarek > > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
