[OSM-talk] Left and Right?

[leblatt]

Robin : my thought, more or less, but you expressed it better.
I've been tagging a few bus stops in my area, and placing them aside,
unconnected to the way felt a bit strange to me.
We should, however, find a standardized system to determine which side of
the way, or more exactly which direction of the bus route the stop is used
for.
I see at least 2 cases that need it :
- in some cases, the bus stops at a given place, but opposite directions,
are located with an offset of 100m. This is quite a difference for a
pedestrian.
- more rarely, a bus will stop at a place when driving in a direction, but
not the other.

What matters here, is not so much the "right" or "left" side positioning of
the stop, as you only have to cross the way to get to it. It is more the
direction "forth" or "back". I think we shouldn’t rely on the side to
determine the direction, as vehicles drive on different sides in different
countries.   

> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : talk-bounces at openstreetmap.org [mailto:talk-
> bounces at openstreetmap.org] De la part de robin paulson
> Envoyé : lundi 25 août 2008 03:48
> À : OSM Talk
> Objet : Re: [OSM-talk] Left and Right?
> 
> Rory McCann wrote:
> > Gervase Markham wrote:
> >> What's current tagging best practice with things which are to the
> left
> >> or the right of a way (e.g. bus stops)?
> >>
> >> A nearly-approved proposal for a canal-side object has been objected
> to
> >> by someone who thinks that the tag should be on a node which is part
> of
> >> the canal rather than next to it, with left/right indicated as part
> of
> >> the tag key name.
> >> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Proposed_features/Mooring
> >>
> >> Do we do that for any other tags? Do we have highway:left=bus_stop?
> >>
> >> Gerv
> >
> > Personally I add the node to left of the way, not as part of the way.
> I
> > believe the OSM theory is that the way represents the middle of the
> > road. So things like mini-roundabounds and traffic lights are part of
> > the way (ie road), but a bus stop is off to the side of the road.
> 
> the problem with this is that 'bus stop' (and canal mooring, etc,)
> implies a place where the bus stops, which is on the road.
> 
> the fact the bus shelter, or sign, or bench, is some distance off to
> the
> side of the road shouldn't matter - the bus itself stops on the road,
> so
> the node imo should be part of the way
> 
> if the bus stop is off to the side of the road, i.e. not connected to
> it, then the bus can't physically get to it, which seems very wrong
> 
> or, consider from the pedestrian's point-of-view:
> it is assumed for all roads except motorways and where explicitly
> stated, that there is foot=yes access. in which case, the
> footpath/sidewalk/pavement is therefore part of the way which
> represents
> the road; we don't draw  a separate way off to one side, running
> parallel. the bus stop must be on the footpath for the pedestrian to be
> able to walk up to it, so again it must be part of the way
> 
> this problem is i think muddled by the fact we represent an area (a
> road) with a linear object (a way), which theoretically has zero width,
> so the natural step from this is to say:
> 'the way represents the centre of the road, and the bus stop/canal
> mooring is not in the centre of the road, it's at the side of the road,
> so I'll put it to one side of the way'
> 
> as for placing the node to one side of the way in order to get the icon
> to be placed correctly, this sounds a lot like 'tagging for the
> renderer'
> 
> _______________________________________________
> talk mailing list
> talk at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk