sent from a phone
On 12. May 2018, at 20:27, Steve Doerr <doerr.step...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Actually, while I know about and abide to the wiki definition, I don't think >> it is intuitive to count some lanes and other not. > > We do that because of a UN convention: > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2011-September/008578.html this convention is not even signed by many countries like the US, Canada, China, Japan, Ireland, UK, Australia and many more. Only a minority of countries is party to the treaty. And the convention has a significantly different definition, as it requires the lane to be suitable for motor vehicles _other than motorcycles_. If you omit this part (like the OSM definition does) it really doesn’t make sense. FWIW, I would not have put motor vehicle but rather vehicle. WRT routing etc., as long as you can read (e.g. calculate) from the data which kind of lane the lanes are, the exact way how the information is stored is only about ease of use, not about impossibility to use the information, so the tag should be defined in a way that it appears most intuitive to the mappers hence least error prone. Apparently from this discussion, people have different expectations what they regard as a lane. Cheers, Martin _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
