[Talk-us] Check your turn:lanes

Jack Burke burkejf3 at gmail.com
Thu Aug 25 00:24:15 UTC 2016


And I, too, have a preference for using "none" instead of leaving and
endless line of "|||||||||" to try to parse.  My eyesight isn't getting
better as I get older.

Having said that, if that had been the only thing they did, I wouldn't have
bothered saying anything.  But when their edits turned continuing lanes
into exit-only lanes...well, then it became a *problem*.

On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 8:20 PM, Tod Fitch <tod at fitchdesign.com> wrote:

> I’m of half a mind to use a script to find the edits in my area where they
> changed something like “left|none|none|” to “left||” and then revert them
> manually.
>
> I know they are both officially acceptable variations but for those of us
> editing by hand counting the occurrences of “|none” to make sure the lane
> count is correct and matches what is on the ground is harder than counting
> the “|” occurrences. At least it is for me and I’ve had decades of practice
> counting open and close parens to make sure compilers wouldn’t squawk at me
> because they weren’t balanced.
>
> And while I haven’t seen a “none;slight_right”, it looks syntacticly
> correct and I can imagine cases where it might be used and would defer to
> the local mapper who used it. (The ones in my area are much more likely to
> be “through;slight_right”.)
>
>
>
> On Aug 24, 2016, at 4:52 PM, Jack Burke <burkejf3 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> No, it's https://github.com/mapbox/mapping/issues/193
>
> And they appear to be telling me that the combination "none;slight_right"
> isn't valid.
>
> Also, in their reply to me, they do specifically mention that they know
> none is valid, yet they're replacing it anyway.  And the worst part of it
> is that while they're using a script to *find* what they think is invalid,
> they're *manually* making the changes.
>
> --jack
>
> On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 7:31 PM, Hans De Kryger <hans.dekryger13 at gmail.com
> > wrote:
>
>> The link Jack's talking about,
>>
>> https://github.com/mapbox/mapping/issues/180
>>
>> Regards,
>> Hans
>>
>> On Aug 24, 2016 4:09 PM, "Toby Murray" <toby.murray at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Mind sharing the link to the GitHub issue?
>>>
>>> Do they think that "none" is an invalid option and are replacing it
>>> with a blank globally? If so, this should be shut down immediately.
>>> "none" and blank are both valid values and while I wouldn't mind
>>> seeing it be consistent, any such edit would need to be discussed
>>> before it is done.
>>>
>>> Toby
>>>
>>> On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 5:19 PM, Jack Burke <burkejf3 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> > An active OSM group (leaving names, etc. out while they check out what
>>> I
>>> > reported) is running a script or plug-in or challenge called "to-fix"
>>> that
>>> > is apparently supposed to help fix incorrect turn:lanes values (and
>>> maybe
>>> > other things, I haven't investigated deeply enough).
>>> >
>>> > The problem is, it's breaking the values instead.  I found a section
>>> of road
>>> > that I'd added turn:lanes to in order to provide lane guidance at an
>>> exit.
>>> > My original value of "none|none|none|none|none;slight_right" was
>>> replaced by
>>> > "||||slight_right".
>>> >
>>> > While, per the wiki, there's nothing particularly wrong with a null
>>> value
>>> > for a field vs. specifying "none" as the value, it *does* make a
>>> difference
>>> > when there are two values in the field, as in my example above.  They
>>> turned
>>> > a continue-on-or-exit lane into an exit-only lane.
>>> >
>>> > So if you find broken lane guidance like that, with empty fields where
>>> > "none" would also be appropriate, that's probably what happened.
>>> Check the
>>> > history on the way and see if you can backtrack what happened
>>> (fortunately,
>>> > the group involved here included a url to a github issue where they are
>>> > tracking what they're doing).
>>> >
>>> > Now I have 200 miles of Interstate to go back through and re-check.
>>> >
>>> > --jack
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > Talk-us mailing list
>>> > Talk-us at openstreetmap.org
>>> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>>> >
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Talk-us mailing list
>>> Talk-us at openstreetmap.org
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/attachments/20160824/1e799fa0/attachment.html>


More information about the Talk-us mailing list