[Tagging] lanes tag dispute
osm at inbox.org
Sun Sep 18 18:18:56 BST 2011
On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 1:12 PM, Anthony <osm at inbox.org> wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 12:59 PM, Nathan Edgars II <neroute2 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 9/18/2011 12:54 PM, Anthony wrote:
>>> On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 12:01 PM, Dave F.<davefox at madasafish.com> wrote:
>>>> On 18/09/2011 16:20, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
>>>>> Here's an example of what tagging every lane would lead to:
>>>> I see nothing intrinsically wrong with that. Lots of splitting ways&
>>>> tagging admittedly, but that's a problem with OSM& its tagging process.
>>> I agree. This data would be quite useful to routing software,
>>> especially when combined with information about which lanes have which
>>> turn restrictions.
>> I think to do this properly you'd have to map every lane as a separate way.
> Properly or perfectly? You can get a lot of information from just the
> number of lanes and the turn restrictions on each. Enough for a
> router to say "stay in one of the left two lanes".
> Yes, mapping every lane as a separate way would be even better, but
> let's go one step at a time.
Actually, I take back that last sentence:
Do you think Garmin is mapping every lane as a separate way here? I
don't think they are, or that they should. I think if I were going to
do it, I'd map this as one way up to the theoretical gore point, and
then as two ways after the theoretical gore point. I wouldn't use
More information about the Tagging