[Tagging] Sample tagging for highways with no lane markings

Javier Sánchez Portero javiersanp at gmail.com
Wed May 23 07:27:11 UTC 2018


Hi Jose

The facts of be able (or not) to overtake and drive in the middle (as Paul
says) are interesting but not necessary relevant for the discussion (IMO).

Anyway, for your example of the LR-333 road, most of the time it isn't
enough wide for two cars to pass comfortably (see here
https://goo.gl/maps/6PC2Wfkfw7A2 like the van has to put the wheel in the
border line and probably stop). In this case, lanes=1, oneway=no is the
best tagging. Would you tag the same in GC-210 road?:
https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/v_G65XwwVnjf0u3i0RxRqA

What I suggest is that the tagging division=no is correct for examples like
this.

2018-05-23 7:07 GMT+01:00 José G Moya Y. <josemoya at gmail.com>:

> @Martin:I don't want to be a troll, but I feel there is some inconsistence
> between answers in this thread and answers in cycle:lanes last week.
>
> @javier, yopaseopor: I don't drive, but I think you can overtake a Guardia
> Civil car in two-way roads where there are one lane.
> The cycle:lane thread told much about what is and isn't to be marked as
> lane, and one case came to my mind.
>  Think of the road from Villoslada de Cameros, Rioja, Spain and Montenegro
> de Cameros, Soria, SameCountry. Rioja side is a two-fake-lanes road ("line
> between lanes just mark centre of road") while Soria side is a two way one
> lane road (markings at sides of the road). The width of the road is the
> same.
>
>
>
> P.D. Enviado desde un móvil (celular). Disculpe las erratas. No veo bien
> la pantalla...
>
> El 23/5/2018 7:16, <osm.tagging at thorsten.engler.id.au> escribió:
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* yo paseopor <yopaseopor at gmail.com>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, 23 May 2018 04:11
>
> *To:* Tag discussion, strategy and related tools <
> tagging at openstreetmap.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [Tagging] Sample tagging for highways with no lane markings
>
>
>
> oneway=no
>
> lanes=1
>
> https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/jYQQwOGMPC6imwyGhMHMCg
>
>
>
>
>
> I would consider that wrong.
>
>
>
> lanes=1
>
> oneway=no
>
>
>
> is a road that is so narrow that opposing traffic can only pass by slowing
> down and making use of shoulder/verge to pass each other. Or maybe even has
> the need to look for a https://wiki.openstreetmap.
> org/wiki/Tag:highway=passing_place to be able to pass each other (like
> the example image shown on that page).
>
>
>
> What your image above shows is pretty clearly a lanes=2, which you can see
> very well by just following the street a few meters:
>
>
>
> https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/6QXgHLK26FTMlmovwuaxfg
>
>
>
> as you can see, there are clear road markings establishing two lanes.
>
>
>
>
>
> Here is an example of the roads I mean that should be tagged with
>
>
>
> lanes=2
>
> divider=no
>
> (oneway=no is normally implicit, so no need to tag it when there is no
> reason to wrongly assume a road should be oneway)
>
>
>
> https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/KQjnvNHHcOLKZj2P4pB2WQ
>
>
>
> You can see that the roads generally have no marked lanes, but at the
> T-intersection there are markings that make it clear the road is intended
> to be a two lane road.
>
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Thorsten
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20180523/cbc4078d/attachment.html>


More information about the Tagging mailing list