[Tagging] Carriageway divider

Pieren pieren3 at gmail.com
Mon Aug 20 15:53:38 BST 2012


On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 4:21 PM, Markus Lindholm
<markus.lindholm at gmail.com> wrote:

The proposal with "divider=solid_line" has a disadvantage : the
meaning of a solid line differs in countries/continents. It should be
better tagged with "divider=no_u_turn" or "no_crossing" or whatever
you like describing the restriction, not the painted line itself.
Another issue is the limitation of one divider per OSM way.

> As I said earlier physical separation doesn't necessary mean "cannot
> pass",

And so what ? The standard defining the limit for dividing highways is
long established in OSM (since beginning).

> I think that it would be a more pressing objective to be able to
> provide a legal route from A to B than to cater for all the shortcuts
> that are possible but not legal. Of course the former doesn't exclude
> the latter and one could conceive of new schemes to indicate where
> it's possible to drive but not legal.

Of course. Like drawing all possible ways to cross a wood. Or the
points where you can climb a wall or a fence. Endless, no ?

Pieren



More information about the Tagging mailing list