+1 from me. Jason (UniEagle) From: Tom Chance Sent: Tuesday, May 07, 2013 1:05 PM To: SomeoneElse Cc: talk-gb OSM List (E-mail) Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Usage of "lanes / turn restrictions" versus "multiple ways" when road is not divided
I have always operated on the assumption that you only split the road into two ways if they are physically separated by a barrier, I'm pretty sure that has been the consensus practice for a good six years. Regards, Tom On 7 May 2013 12:27, SomeoneElse <li...@mail.atownsend.org.uk> wrote: I recently added this note in Lincoln: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/note/1565 "There are a number of problems here. The A15 here isn't a dual carriageway, and the "roads" between the "southbound A15" and Pottergate consequentially don't exist. There may well be turn restrictions into and out of Pottergate and into Lindum Street, but I didn't notice any when I was there recently. Needs a ground survey." This is the area concerned (to see the full extent of what's going on, open in an editor): http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=53.233132&lon=-0.532384&zoom=18&layers=M A reviewed of the note has replied "are you sure? the split road doesn't necessarily mean its a duel carrigeway, just that the two lanes are split, in this case by large road lines". My view was that multiple lanes in a road where there's no physical barrier are best expressed by the "lanes" tag (previously in this example, before I extended Lindum Street to the northbound lane, it was implied that you couldn't cross the road from the northbound lane to walk south into Lindum Street - something I did a couple of weeks ago without problems). A number of other roads locally have this issue - http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/note/1573 is a more extreme one. My question is this - obviously I'm out of step with the previous mappers and the editor of the note, but who's "correct" (or are we all wrong, and should we be doing something completely differently)? I'm concerned that modelling road junctions purely for motor vehicle traffic will (as in the Lindum Street example before I changed it) be incorrect for all other sorts of traffic. Cheers, Andy _______________________________________________ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb -- http://tom.acrewoods.net http://twitter.com/tom_chance -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
_______________________________________________ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
