[Tagging] How to tag: Legally separated ways

Johan C osmned at gmail.com
Mon Oct 15 19:41:32 GMT 2012

I think there's some confusion here. Imagic's question was on a motorway

Three things on this.

1. I've noticed these OSM'ers in favour of option a: Junker, Tobias K.,
Martin, Simone, Alberto and Eckhart. Could any of these OSM'ers please put
an example (older than today [?]) of this tagging on this list? That's
because i've never seen one anywhere in OSM yet.

I've got a lot of examples of option b on motorways.

and the same applies to motorway_links (for exits).  What these examples
have in common is that the restricted zone (see:
http://www.auguszt.de/english/VZ/zeichen4.htm) is not used. Imagics example
a means the restricted zone can be used. Because it's not a physical
seperator. But, as I said, please surprise me by showing a *motorway *example
being used in OSM which shows example a.

2. An OSM'er started a discussion on a German page:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE_talk:Tag:highway%3Dmotorway_link. It
seems that the current wiki on motorway_junctions requires the start of the
split to be at the beginning of the deceleration lane.  "In der Regel ist
das der Punkt, an dem die Ausfädelspur beginnt oder die Auffahrt von der
kreuzenden Straße abzweigt." Thus, the current osm tagging standards imply
that Imagic's option a is wrong (option b too by the way [?]).

3. You could have guessed, but i'm in favour of the way OSM is being used
at this moment, so option b. My arguments are about the same as Colin's.
And because I like the current tagging as shown in above examples.

Cheers, Johan

2012/10/15 Svavar Kjarrval <svavar at kjarrval.is>

>  Then it could be easy for them to tailor those requirements to ignore
> restrictions into the routing software.
> - Svavar Kjarrval
> On 15/10/12 18:45, Colin Smale wrote:
> Not in the UK or the Netherlands at least. They can do whatever they see
> fit in the course of duty, especially with lights and sirens. Of course
> they can be called to account if anything goes wrong. But a policeman
> chasing a criminal who turns the wrong way up a one way street is going to
> follow them and is not going to take a longer route just because of a
> little no-entry sign. Maxspeed, turn restrictions, oneways,
> waiting/stopping/parking restrictions, traffic signals - you name it, they
> can (and do) ignore it when required (sometimes only under certain
> circumstances such as life-and-death).
> Having said that there are certain restrictions which they would do well
> to follow, such as maxheight and maxwidth. If it don't fit, it don't fit,
> with or without blue lights!
> Colin
> On 15/10/2012 20:26, Svavar Kjarrval wrote:
> I think most laws require that even emergency vehicles observe
> restrictions like oneway streets. If there are any restrictions which
> can be broken in case of emergency vehicles, I think they'd program
> their routing software to them.
> - Svavar Kjarrval
> On 15/10/12 18:16, Eckhart Wörner wrote:
>  Hi Colin,
> Am Montag, 15. Oktober 2012, 20:08:01 schrieb Colin Smale:
>  I don't understand why emergency vehicles are so important in this
> discussion. In the first place they have wide-ranging exemptions from
> traffic rules, which (let's be honest) we are never going to tag in OSM.
> Secondly they are never going to be relying on OSM data (or indeed any
> normal sat-nav) for lane-precise routing. They are trained to use their
> eyes and brains to make split-second decisions on what is safe and an
> acceptable risk under the circumstances of that moment. Thirdly, they
> will be about 0.0000000001% of the potential users of OSM data - why
> should we compromise "service" to the vast majority of real users for
> the hypothetical benefit of the very few.
>  I fully agree with you; if we were going to map for emergency vehicles, we'd probably have to add
> oneway:conditional = no @ emergency
> for almost all oneway roads first.
> Eckhart
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing listTagging at openstreetmap.orghttp://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing listTagging at openstreetmap.orghttp://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing listTagging at openstreetmap.orghttp://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20121015/2392c6f1/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 328.png
Type: image/png
Size: 569 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20121015/2392c6f1/attachment-0001.png>

More information about the Tagging mailing list