[Tagging] turn:lanes vs. turnlanes:turn

[Florian Lohoff]

On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 09:28:09AM +0200, Ronnie Soak wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I'm in the process of adding more detail to the major junctions in terms of
> lane counts, turn lanes, width, etc.
> 
> There seem to be two tagging schemes in parallel:
> 
> - the turn:lanes[1] scheme which adds lane descriptions as tags to way
> segments.
> - the turnlanes:turn[2] scheme which adds lane connections via relations to
> the junction nodes

I started documenting a bit after i saw Mapfactor Navigator using the
information for displaying.

lanes= 			# Number of lanes
turn:lanes= 		# Where does each lane turn to through|left|right
destination:lanes= 	# Whats the destination on the sign e.g

lanes=3
turn:lanes=left|through|right
destination:lanes=New York|San Diego|San Francisco

Mapfactor Navigator will show the lanes available - which to use and
the destination the lane leads to.

> So my questions:
> - Are these schemes both still actively used? Are there data consumers who
> use these already?
> - What are the pros and cons of using them both in parallel?
> - Are there better ways of getting *all* of the information across without
> the redundancy introduced by using both schemes?

The only issue i have with the above scheme is the implicit dimensional
extension using the pipe | symbole

Flo
-- 
Florian Lohoff                                                 f at zz.de
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 828 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20131017/52d3f7d6/attachment.pgp>