[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Turn Lanes

bkmap burkhard.kirchner at web.de
Tue Oct 18 14:45:11 BST 2011

Am 18.10.2011 13:17, schrieb Ilya Zverev:
> bkmap:
>> When we already have numbers for the track positions, why we do not
>> use them thus? So the data consumer knows the location without the
>> lanes:location tag.
>> lanes=4
>> lanes:turnleft=3;4
>> lanes:merge=1
>> lanes:through=2;3
> I considered this notation, but it has many drawbacks, the major one
> being the difference in meaning of values of similar-named tags: lanes,
> lanes:psv and lanes:hgv contain number of lanes, and other lanes:*
> therefore also should.
It is not too late to change this. We must change about 11+2+7=20 tags 
worldwide if we consider to modify the notation of the lanes:*:tag.
362	lanes:psv=1
11	lanes:psv=2
4	lanes:psv=backward
2	lanes:psv=3
75	lanes:bus=1
7	lanes:bus=2
38 	lanes:hgv=share_psv_lane
5	lanes:hgv=1

> And yes, I also considered using this notation
> for lanes:*:location - but it is very error-prone, depending on users to
> calculate lane numbers, and "left/right" wouldn't fit in it.
Using verbal values like left and right (except turn...) is IMO more 
fault-prone than defined lane numbers. We need anyway suitable editor 
tools for lanes.

I know that we need a pattern for lanes. I like this beginning first 
also well. But I have, taken as a whole, no good feeling with this 
It leaves open too many issues which could appear later:
How to tag the lane width, different surfaces and restrictions like 
forbidden lane change? How the data consumer knows, how the lanes of the 
road segments are connected together? And so on...


More information about the Tagging mailing list