[Tagging] lanes = 0

Tobias Zwick osm at westnordost.de
Fri Jun 14 11:04:26 UTC 2019

Ok so to recap. All fairly weak reasons (except 2) here, but let's find the best tag:

1. Allroads did not favour nolanes=yes because it is a double negative

2. lanes=no is not so good because there are people who estimate the lanes value if no markings are present (see ael's message). Adding "no" as a possible value that is to be applied when no visual markings are present would make a portion of the currently tagged lanes-tags wrong and thus would be a redefinition of the lanes key.

3. lane_marking=no has of the proposed tags the least semantic similarity to the lanes tag but on the other hand is used a few times already and is safe for the "_" instead of the ":" what Warin suggested

4. lanes:mark...=no would maybe imply that lanes=X must be tagged as well?

On 13/06/2019 15:15, Tobias Zwick wrote:
>> I think a tag to say "lane:marking=no" could be better for that situation???
> 1. or lanes:marked=no? (mark_ed_ instead of mark_ing_)
> Would be (more) consistent with the naming of opening_hours:signed, collection_times:signed, (1k-2k usages each)
> 2. or nolanes=yes?
> Would be consistent with noname=yes, noaddress=yes, ...
> 3. or lane_marking=no? I found this on taginfo, it has 90 usages. Personally, I like either 1 or 2 better though.
> Point 1 and your (Warin's) suggestion have the advantage that it semantically refers to the lanes-key. Though on the other hand, would that imply that lanes=X should always be tagged if lanes:marked=no is tagged?
> Cheers
> Tobias
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

More information about the Tagging mailing list