[Routing] Derive data: number of lanes and capacity

[Stephen Woodbridge]

Peter Childs wrote:
> On 8 August 2010 18:57, Paul Johnson <baloo at ursamundi.org> wrote:
>> On Thu, 22 Jul 2010 13:18:15 +0200, Marcus Wolschon wrote:
>>
>>> Tom Müller wrote:
>>>>> There is an explicit tag
>>>>> lanes=<number>
>>>>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:lanes
>>>> yes. I know. But it's set pretty rarely. For Berlin it's set for
>>>> approx. 6% of all highways ... So I was just wondering if there are any
>>>> defaults which are deriveable by the highway-type or so?!
>>> I would assume that all highway=* to be lanes=1 (residential, secondary,
>>> service,...) except motorways with lanes=2
>>>
>>> Maybe highway=primary be 2 lanes too.
>> There's a lot of one-lane-each-way primaries in the US.  And thanks to
>> some continent-wide data torquing by NE2, a lot of one-lane-each-way
>> trunks.  The former's a fact of life, America has a lot of extremely
>> rural primaries running through badlands, mountain peaks or otherwise
>> just don't require extra capacity despite connecting cities.  The latter
>> probably needs to be solved with a ban.
>>
>>
> 
> The issue is a bit more complex however.....
> 
> We have roads in the UK with.
> 
> a> 2 Lanes in each direction separated by a central reservation.
> b> 2 Lanes in each direction no central reservation just a white
> dotted line, (or solid depending if you can cross it)
> c> 2 Lanes up and 1 down, the extra is usually up hill for crawlers
> d> A hard shoulder
> e> bus lanes, cycle tracks etc
> etc (and any combination of the above)
> 
> truth is as has been said before we probably need some extra data
> structures to hold this data, or some standardised way to do this with
> relations....

Peter, et al,

I think there are also vehicle class restrictions that should be 
collected for example:

HOV lanes
Emergency vehicle only usage
Authorized vehicle only usage

So I would agree the collecting more is better AND that collecting it in 
a standardized form is best so we know what we have in the future when 
we want to use it.

-Steve