[Talk-us] Check your turn:lanes

Jack Burke burkejf3 at gmail.com
Thu Aug 25 17:10:18 UTC 2016

Thus my problem.  The wiki doesn't consider what to do when there's a
branching exit.  It's a complete hole in the tagging schema, even though
it's probably the most common type of freeway exit in the U.S.

So, since there is no "through" indication, I resorted to
"none;slight_right" even though the usage of "none" is technically
incorrect because there *is* a signed indication of a slight_right.  But
being incorrect that way seemed better than being incorrect by using

On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 12:58 PM, David Mease <meased3 at gmail.com> wrote:

> From the wiki:
> The *turn*=* key can be used to specify the *indicated* direction in
> which a way or a lane will lead. It is used on the way segment from the
> first indication via *road markings*, *signposts* or similar indications
> to the junction or completion of merge. If you instead want to specify
> legal turning restrictions please see the article about the restriction
> relation <http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Restriction>.
> The turn:lanes schema is for identifying the painted/signed lane marking
> arrows, not for describing where you can legally go from that lane. That's
> what the turn restriction relation is for.
> Putting "through" on a lane means that there is a straight arrow painted
> on it. Putting "none" on a lane means that there is no marking.
> On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 9:04 AM, Jack Burke <burkejf3 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Even if the road isn't signed that way?  The use of "through" when there
>> is no explicit marking to that effect seems to be contraindicated by the
>> wiki.
>> Don't get me wrong--I don't see why we _couldn't_ use it when that is the
>> obvious traffic direction, even with the lack of explicit signage.  But if
>> that's how we want to use "through" then shouldn't we update the wiki to be
>> more clear?
>> On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 10:58 AM, Paul Johnson <baloo at ursamundi.org>
>> wrote:
>>> 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".
>>> You may want to try through|through|through|through|through;slight_right
>>> as the value; I've noticed routers that actually use this data struggle
>>> with null or none values, which isn't *entirely* unreasonable, but the
>>> former does describe the allowed movements even if the DOT doesn't feel the
>>> need to explicitly paint it out.
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/20160825/485dc84f/attachment.html>

More information about the Talk-us mailing list