<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">A left turn there would be legal,
unless there is a local sign. <br>
So I would not place a turn restriction on it base on satellite
imagery.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
On 12/01/19 07:47, Jem wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAHzj05XoVXZ5C6Mv+Am0KT2VJuioTZGGtMN1hNnbrMfVLdbPEw@mail.gmail.com">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>Spot on. Although the routing engine data could impose a
turn restriction here based upon geometry as part of their
data pipeline. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I wonder if it is legal to turn there and, if not, does
that form part of the ground truth IRT OSM, regardless of
whether there is a sign present.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr">On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 22:53, Marc Gemis <<a
href="mailto:marc.gemis@gmail.com" moz-do-not-send="true">marc.gemis@gmail.com</a>>
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">If you miss the on-ramp
and are waiting for the traffic signals, a<br>
router can recalculate the route in the meantime and still
try to let<br>
you turn left at the traffic signals.<br>
<br>
m.<br>
<br>
On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 1:47 PM Maarten Deen <<a
href="mailto:mdeen@xs4all.nl" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">mdeen@xs4all.nl</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
> I agree that Markus' solution is more elegant (and I
was more looking to<br>
> the offramp itself). I would normally also map it like
that but I also<br>
> don't go out of my way to correct situations like that.<br>
> The way it is mapped now is more organic, more as you
would actually<br>
> drive. As such I don't see it as wrong.<br>
><br>
> I would not add a turn restriction. For routers it is
useless because<br>
> you never get that route anyway.<br>
><br>
> Regards,<br>
> Maarten<br>
><br>
> On 2019-01-11 13:23, Jem wrote:<br>
> >> I'd map that place like that:<br>
> > <a
href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:ID_Screen_Shot_from_-32.0914374,_116.0129206.png"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:ID_Screen_Shot_from_-32.0914374,_116.0129206.png</a><br>
> ><br>
> > I agree. And a supplementary question... would you
also add a<br>
> > no-left-turn restriction from <a
href="https://osm.org/way/581948344" rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://osm.org/way/581948344</a>
at<br>
> > <a href="https://osm.org/node/5680879176"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://osm.org/node/5680879176</a>?
I would, and have done in the past.<br>
> > But to be honest, I'm not sure if a turn like that
(having already<br>
> > passed the slip lane designated for the turn) is
legal or not.<br>
> ><br>
> > On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 20:47, Markus <<a
href="mailto:selfishseahorse@gmail.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">selfishseahorse@gmail.com</a>><br>
> > wrote:<br>
> ><br>
> >> On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 07:40, Maarten Deen
<<a href="mailto:mdeen@xs4all.nl" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">mdeen@xs4all.nl</a>> wrote:<br>
> >>><br>
> >>> On 2019-01-11 07:16, Petra Rajka - (p)
wrote:<br>
> >>><br>
> >>>><br>
> >>>> See below two cases where we would
simplify the geometry:<br>
> >>>><br>
> >>>> * -32.0914374, 116.0129206<br>
> >>><br>
> >>> Is seen no big problem in how the roads
are layed out there.<br>
> >> Coming from<br>
> >>> the motorway there is a clear divider
where the offramp connects<br>
> >> to the<br>
> >>> Albany Highway.<br>
> >><br>
> >> <<a
href="https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/596272469"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/596272469</a>>
and<br>
> >> <<a
href="https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/596272466"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/596272466</a>>
form a<br>
> >> double-rectangle,<br>
> >> but there isn't such a divider. I'd map that
place like that:<br>
> >><br>
> >><br>
> > <a
href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:ID_Screen_Shot_from_-32.0914374,_116.0129206.png"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:ID_Screen_Shot_from_-32.0914374,_116.0129206.png</a><br>
> >><br>
> >>> I have more problems with the tags of the
on- and offramp. They<br>
> >> are<br>
> >>> mapped as motorway when they should be
mapped as motorway_link.<br>
> >> The two<br>
> >>> bridges in the on- and offramp are mapped
as motorway_link.<br>
> >><br>
> >> +1. I'd also delete the descriptions like
Tonkin Highway Southbound<br>
> >> Ramp off to Albany Highway in the name tag
unless the ramps are<br>
> >> signed<br>
> >> like that on site.<br>
> >><br>
> >>>> * -35.3409195, 149.1616891<br>
> >>><br>
> >>> Ways 77001149 and 77000891 should IMHO not
be mapped like that but<br>
> >>> mapped with turn:lanes.<br>
> >><br>
> >> +1<br>
> >><br>
> >> Regards<br>
> >><br>
> >> Markus</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>