[Tagging] Slow vehicle turnouts

[SelfishSeahorse]

SMV seems to be a North American term, e.g. see:

http://www.mto.gov.on.ca/english/vehicles/slow-moving-vehicle-sign.shtml
http://safeny.ny.gov/media/SMV-broc4-09.pdf

But i would be fine with slow_vehicle as well.

Regards
Markus



On Tue, 11 Sep 2018 at 18:01, Steve Doerr <doerr.stephen at gmail.com> wrote:

> Let's scotch this idea of smv straightaway. Whereas PSV, HGV and LGV are
> well-established abbreviations, at least in UK English, I've never come
> across slow-moving vehicles referred to as SMVs - this seems to have been
> made up on the fly in this thread. We don't really like abbreviations in
> OSM anyway. As slow-moving_vehicle is a bit of a mouthful, I'd suggest
> slow_vehicle as a reasonable tag to use. Or crawler.
>
>
> Steve
>
>
> On 11/09/2018 13:07, Dave Swarthout wrote:
>
> Okay, I guess the consensus here is that, even though I dislike it, I must
> use the lanes approach. In my original tagging, I had invented a new
> category of service road, service=slow_vehicle_turnout, but perhaps an
> abbreviated form of slow_moving_vehicle would be more consistent and easier
> in the end. In the example provided by SelfishSeahorse, he uses
> smv:lanes:forward=|designated (as well as its counterpart in lanes:forward)
> and that seems consistent with other abbreviated tags, like hov and hgv so
> I'll use that terminology in my tagging. Perhaps someone of you would like
> to add the smv abbreviation and description to the Wiki.
>
> Thanks for the input and discussion,
>
> AlaskaDave
>
> On Tue, Sep 11, 2018 at 3:24 AM Kevin Kenny <kevin.b.kenny at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> > On Mon, Sep 10, 2018, 14:36 SelfishSeahorse <selfishseahorse at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> I wasn't aware that it is allowed to cross a single solid line in the
>> >> USA. Hence forget the overtaking:lanes:<forward/backward>=* tags in
>> >> the example in my last message.
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 10, 2018 at 3:48 PM Paul Johnson <baloo at ursamundi.org> wrote:
>> >
>> > It's a recentish (late 90s/early 2000s) update to the MUTCD, before
>> that you would be correct (and usually as a stopgap between striping,
>> places where this is still the case is highlighted by signage, but this is
>> getting to be rare as most plsces have had long enough to require a repaint
>> if not a repave since then).
>>
>> The states have had considerable leeway in how they mark their own
>> highways (the Federal government has control only on the highways that
>> it funds).  New York has used a single solid white line to mean 'lane
>> crossing discouraged but not prohibited' for the 45 years that I've
>> been driving here. Prohibited lane crossings have, for at least that
>> long, been set off by double lines or by partial-barrier lines with
>> the solid line toward the lane that must not be departed from.
>>
>> I seem to recall that the meaning of a single solid yellow line has
>> varied from 'crossing discouraged', to 'crossing forbidden but left
>> turns permitted', to 'crossing prohibited'. The current drivers'
>> manual states that they have the same regulatory effect as a double
>> yellow line. (Left turns across a double yellow are permitted only
>> when they can be accomplished without impeding traffic in either
>> direction and only into private driveways, entrances and alleys.) The
>> only single yellow center lines I've seen in the last couple of
>> decades have been on private roads, where they mean, 'the owner was
>> too cheap to shell out for enough paint for standard markings.'
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>
>
>
> --
> Dave Swarthout
> Homer, Alaska
> Chiang Mai, Thailand
> Travel Blog at http://dswarthout.blogspot.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing listTagging at openstreetmap.orghttps://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
> [image: Avast logo] <https://www.avast.com/antivirus>
>
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> www.avast.com <https://www.avast.com/antivirus>
>
> <#m_-3098846559126106569_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20180911/5fe5ceb7/attachment-0001.html>