[OSM-talk] highway=minor (Was:More on osmarender)

[Andy Robinson]

Found something on the surrycc.gov.uk website which should do:

"Single carriageway roads may be provided with a centre line marking,
although not where the width is less than 5.5 metres (in rural areas) and 6
metres (in urban areas). If a centre line marking is provided warning lines
will also be provided to indicate road junctions

The minimum width acceptable for a traffic lane, including those at traffic
signals, is 2.5 metres."

Cheers

Andy

Andy Robinson
Andy_J_Robinson at blueyonder.co.uk 

>-----Original Message-----
>From: talk-bounces at openstreetmap.org [mailto:talk-
>bounces at openstreetmap.org] On Behalf Of Andy Robinson
>Sent: 03 September 2006 11:36 PM
>To: 'Dean Earley'; 'Talk Openstreetmap'
>Subject: RE: [OSM-talk] highway=minor (Was:More on osmarender)
>
>A road will only have a white line down it if it's over a certain width,
>otherwise there is danger that you could catch the edge or kerb if you
>drove
>the way you do everywhere else. I forget the width requirement (a similar
>related value also dictates when a road has to have temp traffic lights
>rather than narrow lanes when doing road works). I should have it somewhere
>so will look up if nobody gets to it first.
>
>Cheers
>
>Andy
>
>Andy Robinson
>Andy_J_Robinson at blueyonder.co.uk
>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: talk-bounces at openstreetmap.org [mailto:talk-
>>bounces at openstreetmap.org] On Behalf Of Dean Earley
>>Sent: 03 September 2006 11:22 PM
>>To: Talk Openstreetmap
>>Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] highway=minor (Was:More on osmarender)
>>
>>>>> Also, I noticed that highway=minor isn't being rendered by the
>>>>> current osm-map-features.xml. Do people think that just adding
>>>>> "|minor" to all the unclassified tag entries is the right thing to
>>>>> do, or should we come up with some rendering between unclassified and
>>>>> secondary for these roads?
>>>>
>>>> I was using minor but have since changed them all to unclassified but
>>>> I do think there should be a highway=tertiary as well (IIRC, C roads
>>>> do exist but are hard to identify)
>>>> This would allow for majorish roads that are technically
>"unclassified".
>>>
>>> I notice that highway=minor seems to have vanished from map features.
>>
>>It was originally (mistakingly) added by me after seeing one of the
>>pages (pre the highway change) mention it.
>>
>>> This isn't ideal, since:
>>> a) there's a bunch of data out there that uses it that hasn't been
>>changed
>>> b) there is a big differnce between many c roads, and many tiny country
>>>    lanes, and it'd be good to be able to spot that without looking at
>the
>>>    width (if given)
>>
>>Even the OS has two grades of "unclassified". I think it is whether it
>>has central lines or not. These are also rendered at two different sizes
>>on their map.
>>
>>--
>>Dean Earley, Dee (dean at earlsoft.co.uk)
>>
>>irc:    irc://irc.blitzed.org/
>>web:    http://personal.earlsoft.co.uk
>>phone:  +44 (0)780 8369596
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>talk mailing list
>>talk at openstreetmap.org
>>http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>talk mailing list
>talk at openstreetmap.org
>http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk