[Talk-us] Check your turn:lanes

Bill R. WASHBURN dygituljunky at gmail.com
Fri Aug 26 15:00:59 UTC 2016


Since the throughness is implied by the lane markings and the LACK of
directional markings in the greater context of state law and the existence
of the MUTCD, it would not be inappropriate to mark these as through lanes.
If marking the lanes as "none" implies to the computer "no direction
control" (in some parts of the world, the practice seems to be that turning
from any point in your direction of travel is acceptable and the opposite
is true in the US), it would seem that tagging for the implied throughness
would be the best course of action.

Bill

On Aug 25, 2016 13:54, "Jack Burke" <burkejf3 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Paul, your examples are pretty much exactly what I've been doing, with
the exception that for the last one I was using:
>
> turn:lanes=none|none|none;slight_right
>
> because of the aforementioned discussion of whether or not to use
"through" without signage.
>
> --jack
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/attachments/20160826/c61e0261/attachment.html>


More information about the Talk-us mailing list