On Fri, 21 Aug 2009 07:48:18 +1000, Roy Wallace
wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 6:11 AM, Tobias Knerr wrote:
>>
>> I believe it fits the project's general spirit to allow mappers to
>> choose their level of detail (and other mappers to increase it if they
>> are ready to invest the time).
>
> +1
On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 6:11 AM, Tobias Knerr wrote:
>
> I believe it fits the project's general spirit to allow mappers to
> choose their level of detail (and other mappers to increase it if they
> are ready to invest the time).
+1
> Lod steps could be described as
>
> 1. road without lane detai
Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> I'm opposing this approach of just tagging different lanes to one way
> as this gets too complicated in complex situations (I know situations
> with more than 18 "lanes"). I'd prefer to get to a
> map-all-lanes-and-dividers-as-separate-ways-approach and then
> recombine
then we are closer as I thought. still mapping multiple parallel lanes
with multiple lines is too difficult. consider a bestcase accuracy of
+/- 2-3m with handheld gps and current areal pics.
this is the size of a typical car lane. aligning many smaller
structures is just magic guessing.
the
2009/8/20 Apollinaris Schoell :
> how could you do this practically? aligning 18 lanes as individual
> ways is impossible in the current data model and editors.
Why? It's very possible: just do it.
Btw: I's not 18 lanes, but
1+parking+1+divider+2+divider+3+divider+3+divider+2+divider+buslane+divi
On Aug 20, 2009, at 7:56 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> 2009/8/20 Peter Körner :
>> Wmm why can't we say:
>>
>> 1L for the leftmost lane
>> 2L for the second lane from left
>> 1R for the rightmost lane
>>
>> where left and right is seen in driving-direction. So then the 2
>> rightmode lane sepe
2009/8/20 Peter Körner :
> Wmm why can't we say:
>
> 1L for the leftmost lane
> 2L for the second lane from left
> 1R for the rightmost lane
>
> where left and right is seen in driving-direction. So then the 2
> rightmode lane seperates you can talk about 1R and 2R.
>
I'm opposing this approach of
Wmm why can't we say:
1L for the leftmost lane
2L for the second lane from left
1R for the rightmost lane
where left and right is seen in driving-direction. So then the 2
rightmode lane seperates you can talk about 1R and 2R.
Peter
Yann Coupin schrieb:
> Plus what does "inner" mean on a oneway
Roy Wallace wrote:
> But I agree with Tobias also - we should first create a "good
> concept for modelling the lanes themselves". Tobias, could you link to
> the latest/most promising proposal, if there is one?
If we already had a superior proposal, this would be a lot easier. What
we have so far
Well, I don't know about Hebrew. But at least some of the languages
that use Arabic script (there are many) write the sentences and words
from right to left, but the numbers from left to right. I have no
idea about Chinese/Japanese etc. But I think that left to right for
numbers, while not unive
On Wed, 19 Aug 2009 15:01:24 +0100 (BST), Steve Hill
wrote:
> On Wed, 19 Aug 2009, Peter Körner wrote:
>
>>> What's left to be clarified is how lanes are numbered.
>>>
>>
>> I'd suggest to be the inner one to be 1, ascending the more you're going
>> to
>> the border
>
> The police tend to numb
On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 12:39 AM, Yann Coupin wrote:
> Plus what does "inner" mean on a oneway road? I think it's crucial
> that lane 1 is either left or right depending uppon what is decided
> but that it stays the same accross the world. It'll be unusable
> otherwise.
>
> I propose 1 is left beca
If we just add lane information to
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:destination_sign can we
make it work?
/Martin
> Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2009 09:55:01 +0100 (BST)
> From: Steve Hill
> Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Lane turn restrictions
> To: Yann Coupin
> Cc: talk@op
Plus what does "inner" mean on a oneway road? I think it's crucial
that lane 1 is either left or right depending uppon what is decided
but that it stays the same accross the world. It'll be unusable
otherwise.
I propose 1 is left because we start to write from the left. It's
completly arbi
On Wed, 19 Aug 2009, Peter Körner wrote:
What's left to be clarified is how lanes are numbered.
I'd suggest to be the inner one to be 1, ascending the more you're going to
the border
The police tend to number them with lane 1 being closest to the footway
(i.e. the left lane in the UK, th
>
> What's left to be clarified is how lanes are numbered.
>
I'd suggest to be the inner one to be 1, ascending the more you're going
to the border
Peter
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
I admit that I ended up with a large and complex proposal. Since then
it appeared that some aspects have already been covered. But not all
of the lane part AFAIK. What you suggest whould probably be an
independant proposal, at least for clarity reason, but has value
nonetheless although I w
Steve Hill wrote:
> Is there any suggested way of marking up turn restrictions for individual
> lanes of a road to enable sat navs to provide lane guidance (e.g. "keep
> right", "move into the left lane", etc)?
There is no accepted or widely used approach to do this, and actually I
don't think i
On Wed, 19 Aug 2009, Yann Coupin wrote:
> I once started a proposition to do just that but it didn't get much traction,
> feel free to discuss it.
>
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Relation:type%3Droute_instruction
I've not read the discussion page yet, but some initial th
Le 19 août 09 à 01:11, Steve Hill a écrit :
>
> I looked on the wiki but couldn't see anything...
>
> Is there any suggested way of marking up turn restrictions for
> individual
> lanes of a road to enable sat navs to provide lane guidance (e.g.
> "keep
> right", "move into the left lane", et
20 matches
Mail list logo
