Re: [Talk-us] Best practice in Lane Editing 3

On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 2:15 AM, Horea Meleg wrote: > Hello all, > > Me and my Telenav colleagues are editing lane numbers in Detroit area. We > have two cases, where any opinion would be appreciated. > > *Case 1 * > > We are editing lanes and turn lanes and we came

Re: [Talk-us] Best practice in Lane Editing 3

According to one Georgia lawyer's website[1] as well as the Indiana driver's handbook[2], it is illegal to cross a solid white line between lanes. Having said that, I would map Case 1 as shown in A, because I don't think any police officer is going to bother writing a ticket if someone does so

Re: [Talk-us] Best practice in Lane Editing 3

On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 10:14 PM, Eric Ladner wrote: > Just to play Devil's advocate: B is probably more TECHNICALLY correct since > a solid white line indicates "lane change discouraged, but not illegal" and > you'd probably want the routing software to indicate where the

Re: [Talk-us] Best practice in Lane Editing 3

yeah, I agree.. just prodding thought. On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 3:21 PM Tod Fitch wrote: > At least one routing app I have been using seems to use the turn:lane > tagging [1] convention shown on the wiki. That allows the route guidance to > let you know you should be

Re: [Talk-us] Best practice in Lane Editing 3

At least one routing app I have been using seems to use the turn:lane tagging [1] convention shown on the wiki. That allows the route guidance to let you know you should be getting into the turn lane at an appropriate time. Not sure if the change:lanes [2] tagging is being followed but it does

Re: [Talk-us] Best practice in Lane Editing 3

Case 1: First example is much closer to how I would tag it based on the the rule that it should not be a separate way if it is only separated by paint. Case 2: I would not expect the two paths to be considered safe or legal where I live in the US (not in Michigan). While there is some effort at

Re: [Talk-us] Best practice in Lane Editing 3

On 07/13/2017 02:15 AM, Horea Meleg wrote: > *According to US driving rules, are those turns allowed? Are you allowed > to go on the link if you are coming from South?* Probably not; even if technically not prohibited explicitly, it would probably be cited as reckless driving or careless driving

Re: [Talk-us] Best practice in Lane Editing 2

une 19, 2017 4:37:09 PM To: Paul Johnson Cc: Horea Meleg; talk-US@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Best practice in Lane Editing 2 For the ‘dashed line’ center turn lanes: what you do makes sense to me too. I have used center_turn_lane=yes in the past, but that is not documented and

Re: [Talk-us] Best practice in Lane Editing 2

On 06/20/2017 06:43 AM, Paul Johnson wrote: > Depends on the region. Oregon, Oklahoma, and California often includes > the arrows anyway. Texas often includes the arrows as well. -- Shawn K. Quinn http://www.rantroulette.com http://www.skqrecordquest.com

Re: [Talk-us] Best practice in Lane Editing 2

On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 3:37 PM, wrote: > The turn lanes plugin seems to support this nicely: https://www.dropbox. > com/s/8wmp5h2cn931pic/Screenshot%202017-06-19%2014.33.40.jpg?dl=0 — even > though the center lane is rarely marked with left turn arrows, as suggested > by the

Re: [Talk-us] Best practice in Lane Editing 2

On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 10:44 PM, John F. Eldredge wrote: > Judging from the markings, that is a turn lane shared by both directions. > You cannot legally use it to pass a car in the main driving lane, you can > only use it to make a left turn. Lanes of this type are

Re: [Talk-us] Best practice in Lane Editing 2

On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 10:37 PM, wrote: > The turn lanes plugin seems to support this nicely: > https://www.dropbox.com/s/8wmp5h2cn931pic/Screenshot%202017-06-19%2014.33.40.jpg?dl=0 > — even though the center lane is rarely marked with left turn arrows, as > suggested by the

[Talk-us] Best practice in Lane Editing 2

> > Me and my Telenav colleagues are editing lane numbers in Detroit area. > We found some cases that looks like this (42.43651692568901, > -83.51102781049859): Our question is: what is the central lane used for and > how do we map it? Should we count it as a separate lane and have 3 lanes in >

Re: [Talk-us] Best practice in Lane Editing 2

Judging from the markings, that is a turn lane shared by both directions. You cannot legally use it to pass a car in the main driving lane, you can only use it to make a left turn. Lanes of this type are nicknamed "suicide lanes", because of the possibility that vehicles going in opposite

Re: [Talk-us] Best practice in Lane Editing 2

For the ‘dashed line’ center turn lanes: what you do makes sense to me too. I have used center_turn_lane=yes in the past, but that is not documented and I wouldn’t encourage it. This way it fits nicely into the lanes schema. The turn lanes plugin seems to support this nicely:

Re: [Talk-us] Best practice in Lane Editing 2

On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 9:24 AM, Tod Fitch wrote: > I haven’t settled on a tagging for when the center area is blocked by > solid lines (legally meaning don’t cross), but an access tag would be > reasonable. An alternative or addition to an access control could be using >

Re: [Talk-us] Best practice in Lane Editing 2

> On Jun 19, 2017, at 4:20 AM, Paul Johnson wrote: > > In this case, with the dual-direction turn lane, I would label that with > lanes:both_ways=1 and turn:lanes:both_ways=left. If the center lane has two > solid lines (making it a flush median), then lanes:both_ways=1

Re: [Talk-us] Best practice in Lane Editing 2

On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 7:16 AM, Kerry Irons wrote: > Center lane is a left turn only lane. If the space to the side of the > solid white lines is a bike lane, then this street may have be subject to a > “road diet” in which a 4 lane street is reduced to two travel

Re: [Talk-us] Best practice in Lane Editing 2

in that configuration. From: Paul Johnson [mailto:ba...@ursamundi.org] Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 7:21 AM To: Horea Meleg <horea.me...@telenav.com> Cc: talk-US@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Best practice in Lane Editing 2 In this case, with the dual-direction turn lane, I would

Re: [Talk-us] Best practice in Lane Editing 2

In this case, with the dual-direction turn lane, I would label that with lanes:both_ways=1 and turn:lanes:both_ways=left. If the center lane has two solid lines (making it a flush median), then lanes:both_ways=1 and access:lanes:both_ways=no On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 6:17 AM, Horea Meleg

[Talk-us] Best practice in Lane Editing 2

Hello all, Me and my Telenav colleagues are editing lane numbers in Detroit area. We found some cases that looks like this (42.43651692568901, -83.51102781049859): [cid:image001.jpg@01D2E906.C4A4DCA0] Our question is: what is the central lane used for and how do we map it? Should we count it as a

Re: [Talk-us] Best practice in Lane Editing

* Paul Johnson [mailto:ba...@ursamundi.org] > *Sent:* Thursday, April 27, 2017 9:04 AM > *To:* Horea Meleg <horea.me...@telenav.com> > *Cc:* Rihards <ric...@nakts.net>; Hans De Kryger < > hans.dekryge...@gmail.com>; talk-US@openstreetmap.org > *Subject:* Re: [Talk-us]

Re: [Talk-us] Best practice in Lane Editing

[mailto:ba...@ursamundi.org] Sent: Thursday, April 27, 2017 9:04 AM To: Horea Meleg <horea.me...@telenav.com> Cc: Rihards <ric...@nakts.net>; Hans De Kryger <hans.dekryge...@gmail.com>; talk-US@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Best practice in Lane Editing On Tue, Apr 25, 2017

Re: [Talk-us] Best practice in Lane Editing

On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 4:19 AM, Horea Meleg wrote: > Hy guys, thanks for your responses. > Do you think that is better to move motorway_junction where continuous > line begins? In real life you can't cross a continuous line, so I think it > should be the same in OSM.

Re: [Talk-us] Best practice in Lane Editing

On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 6:37 AM Marc Gemis wrote: > Oh , I thought position 2 was where the physical barrier ended. Must > have misinterpreted the image > I had a quick look at the street level imagery ( https://goo.gl/maps/YYRH4eWpnjz or

Re: [Talk-us] Best practice in Lane Editing

Oh , I thought position 2 was where the physical barrier ended. Must have misinterpreted the image On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 1:28 PM, Harald Kliems wrote: > > > On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 12:09 AM Marc Gemis wrote: >> >> I thought the "standard" was to put

Re: [Talk-us] Best practice in Lane Editing

On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 12:09 AM Marc Gemis wrote: > I thought the "standard" was to put the exit and entrance nodes at the > place where there is no physical barrier. Continuous white lines > should be mapped with change:lanes and should have no impact on the > position of

Re: [Talk-us] Best practice in Lane Editing

t;> From: Rihards [mailto:ric...@nakts.net] >> Sent: Tuesday, April 25, 2017 11:05 AM >> To: Hans De Kryger <hans.dekryge...@gmail.com>; Horea Meleg >> <horea.me...@telenav.com> >> Cc: talk-US@openstreetmap.org >> Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Best practice in L

Re: [Talk-us] Best practice in Lane Editing

lane at the beginning. > Thanks, > Horea > > -Original Message- > From: Rihards [mailto:ric...@nakts.net] > Sent: Tuesday, April 25, 2017 11:05 AM > To: Hans De Kryger <hans.dekryge...@gmail.com>; Horea Meleg > <horea.me...@telenav.com> > Cc: t

Re: [Talk-us] Best practice in Lane Editing

...@nakts.net] Sent: Tuesday, April 25, 2017 11:05 AM To: Hans De Kryger <hans.dekryge...@gmail.com>; Horea Meleg <horea.me...@telenav.com> Cc: talk-US@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Best practice in Lane Editing On 2017.04.25. 09:50, Hans De Kryger wrote: > The motor

Re: [Talk-us] Best practice in Lane Editing

On 2017.04.25. 09:50, Hans De Kryger wrote: > The motorway link should be dropped down to 2 where the lane actually starts between 1 & 2 for sure. > *Regards,** > * > > *Hans* > > On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 11:45 PM, Horea Meleg > wrote: