Re: [Tagging] I can't support transit:lanes

From: Paul Johnson Sent: Thursday, 14 June 2018 08:00 To: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools Subject: Re: [Tagging] I can't support transit:lanes So how is this different from placement=transition, then? placement=* defines the relation between the position of the way

Re: [Tagging] I can't support transit:lanes

to be exactly one node where they connect. That is your via node. *From:* Paul Johnson *Sent:* Wednesday, 13 June 2018 08:46 *To:* Tag discussion, strategy and related tools *Subject:* Re: [Tagging] I can't support transit:lanes You'd have more than one via way for the transit:lanes relation

Re: [Tagging] I can't support transit:lanes

: Wednesday, 13 June 2018 08:46 To: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools Subject: Re: [Tagging] I can't support transit:lanes You'd have more than one via way for the transit:lanes relation. On Tue, Jun 12, 2018, 01:11 Mateusz Konieczny mailto:matkoni...@tutanota.com> > wrote

Re: [Tagging] I can't support transit:lanes

You'd have more than one via way for the transit:lanes relation. On Tue, Jun 12, 2018, 01:11 Mateusz Konieczny wrote: > > 11. Jun 2018 23:02 by ba...@ursamundi.org: > > On Sun, Jun 10, 2018, 23:43 Bryan Housel wrote: > >> The only way I’ll be able to support lane transitions would be as a >>

Re: [Tagging] I can't support transit:lanes

11. Jun 2018 23:02 by ba...@ursamundi.org : > On Sun, Jun 10, 2018, 23:43 Bryan Housel <> bhou...@gmail.com > > > wrote: >> The only way I’ll be able to support lane transitions would be as a relation >> that has similar semantics to turn

Re: [Tagging] I can't support transit:lanes

On Sun, Jun 10, 2018, 23:43 Bryan Housel wrote: > The only way I’ll be able to support lane transitions would be as a > relation that has similar semantics to turn restrictions.. from/via/to. > Keep it simple (no multi via ways please). This is already an understood > way of tagging things that

Re: [Tagging] I can't support transit:lanes

11. Jun 2018 19:17 by matkoni...@tutanota.com : > Note that JOSM issue was not closed as WONTFIX (yet?). And now it got closed as wontfix. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org

Re: [Tagging] I can't support transit:lanes

> On Jun 11, 2018, at 1:17 PM, Mateusz Konieczny > wrote: > 11. Jun 2018 13:09 by bhou...@gmail.com : > But for right now, can we get that page taken down so people stop tagging it, > and have a proper proposal put up and accepted? > I added >

Re: [Tagging] I can't support transit:lanes

11. Jun 2018 13:09 by bhou...@gmail.com : > But for right now, can we get that page taken down so people stop tagging it, > and have a proper proposal put up and accepted? I added

Re: [Tagging] I can't support transit:lanes

From: Simon Poole Sent: Tuesday, 12 June 2018 01:44 To: tagging@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [Tagging] I can't support transit:lanes You are seriously telling me that if you have two ways that share a node, you are unable to figure out what that node is without having it explicitly

Re: [Tagging] I can't support transit:lanes

Am 11.06.2018 um 17:19 schrieb osm.tagg...@thorsten.engler.id.au: > > *From:*Bryan Housel > *Sent:* Tuesday, 12 June 2018 01:12 > *To:* osm-tagging > *Subject:* Re: [Tagging] I can't support transit:lanes > >   > > I’ve already written plenty of code to

Re: [Tagging] I can't support transit:lanes

From: Bryan Housel Sent: Tuesday, 12 June 2018 01:12 To: osm-tagging Subject: Re: [Tagging] I can't support transit:lanes Two issues here. First, the tag is not “transit:lanes” the tag is “transit” and it can be used with the generalized “:lanes” suffix. There are general rules

Re: [Tagging] I can't support transit:lanes

> You are seriously telling me that if you have two ways that share a node, you > are unable to figure out what that node is without having it explicitly > listed as a totally redundant member of the relation? Yes - do you think the via node in a turn restriction is also redundant? It helps

Re: [Tagging] I can't support transit:lanes

From: Bryan Housel Sent: Tuesday, 12 June 2018 01:12 To: osm-tagging Subject: Re: [Tagging] I can't support transit:lanes I’ve already written plenty of code to deal with turn restrictions. There are lots of rules for splitting and joining things to other things depending on where

Re: [Tagging] I can't support transit:lanes

> Two issues here. > First, the tag is not “transit:lanes” the tag is “transit” and it can be used > with the generalized “:lanes” suffix. > There are general rules for the :lanes suffix which can be added to pretty > much any tag you would have on a highway were the value could be different >

Re: [Tagging] I can't support transit:lanes

From: Jo Sent: Monday, 11 June 2018 17:47 To: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools Subject: Re: [Tagging] I can't support transit:lanes Name should indeed be changed, but I'd go for lanes:transition, so it groups with the other lanes related tags. Not sure if that is a good type

Re: [Tagging] I can't support transit:lanes

Amazing, but I’m not surprised that the JOSM devs figured this out years ago :) OK, so we should probably have a conversation about how a tag like this can continue to exist for years with - not just no support but - literally everyone who writes software speaking out against it. But for right

Re: [Tagging] I can't support transit:lanes

Just as Bryan does, I can see supporting special casing transit relations (as we already have to do the same for turn restrictions). I am -very- reluctant to support one-off tag semantics that require special code to handle them. Note with respect to the parallel discussion on tagging

Re: [Tagging] I can't support transit:lanes

Name should indeed be changed, but I'd go for lanes:transition, so it groups with the other lanes related tags. Not sure if that is a good type for the relation though. There is no need to bother the user, in case there is an adjacent way with this tag. Then it's obvious which part of the

Re: [Tagging] I can't support transit:lanes

For JOSM see https://josm.openstreetmap.de/ticket/11054 11. Jun 2018 06:42 by bhou...@gmail.com : > I’m not going to add a special rule in iD to warn people if they are > splitting a way with a lane transition tag.  I don’t

[Tagging] I can't support transit:lanes

I’ve had a few recent conversations about this proposal: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/transit Unfortunately I can’t support it. Not only is the name bad (it should be named `transition:lanes` but