At 2010-07-23 18:53, John Smith wrote:
On 23 July 2010 23:48, Alan Mintz <alan_mintz+...@earthlink.net> wrote: > I spend a totally unreasonable amount of time mapping turn restrictions > (mostly no-u-turn) as it is, and even that is hard to justify.
I was trying to say that it takes far too long to create this relation, which is necessary on maybe 25% of the intersections I'm mapping.
I guess this goes back to the default values for a region/state/country, but in Australia some states have it so that it's legal to do U-turns unless signed otherwise, and other states have it illegal to do U-turns unless it's signed... Should we be tagging where it's allowed or where it's not allowed or where it's signed specifically one way or the other?
Tag where it's signed, which is generally the exception to the default. In places where the law is no-U-turn by default, I would expect to see "U-turn OK" signs where they are allowed. In places where the law is that U-turns are allowed by default, I see "no U-turn" signs where they are disallowed.
It seems that navigation software needs to know which is the default, though. Yet another case for tagging defaults on admin boundaries.
-- Alan Mintz <alan_mintz+...@earthlink.net> _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
