[OSM-talk] How to tag lanes, not ways, was: Deprecating the use of Tag:highway=stop in favour of Key:stop

[John Smith]

2009/8/31 Anthony <osm at inbox.org>:
> What solution is better?  Your lane-based solution doesn't work if there is
> only one lane with bi-directional traffic.  The solution of adding a node
> and a direction would be second best, but I think it's clunky adding
> multiple extra nodes instead of one relation.

You really haven't read or understood the details I've put forth.

As far as I can tell my solution does work, you treat the lanes as
children of the way, so a bi-direction way with traffic while 1 way,
is 2 lanes, and being able to tag those independent of each other is
the key to all this. Please re-read my previous posts on this matter.

> I don't see the practical application.  We're a long way from having our
> cars drive for us using micro-level OSM data and some advanced positioning
> system.  If you want to set up a system that can handle that kind of detail,
> be my guest.  But it's not needed for something trivial like stop signs and
> maximum speeds.

THere is many reasons I've already outlined why it's needed, if you
don't grasp the concepts please ask for clarification but stop trying
to send things off in a different directions that do not address the
issues previously outlined in this thread.

> Are you sure that's always true?  I'm certainly not going to adhere to that
> restriction.  If you have a single way, there is an assumption that you can

The you will be fighting every other mapper out there, it's clear that
physical barriers are used, not painted ones so you will end up with
edit wars when people confused with how you've gone off on your own
and it doesn't match what everyone else is doing.

> I'm not against it.  I just think it's a lot of work for very little
> benefit.  And there are probably better solutions.  If you really want to
> map every single lane of a road, why not make the lane the base unit and use

I'm not trying to map individual lanes when there is no need to, I'm
suggesting a system that can tag individual lanes if needed. You are
the only one suggesting anything different.

> relations or some other method to tie the lanes together in areas where lane
> changing is allowed (lane changing allowed between way X, Y, and Z from node
> A to node B)?

But that's a hack to work with the existing framework, ie tagging for
software which isn't supposed to be done. By having the ability to tag
individual lanes if needed would stop us from needing to make such bad
hacks just to stay withing the current framework.

You really haven't grasped the concept I've put forward, please
re-read and ask for clarification rather than hijacking the thread.