Thus my problem. The wiki doesn't consider what to do when there's a branching exit. It's a complete hole in the tagging schema, even though it's probably the most common type of freeway exit in the U.S.
So, since there is no "through" indication, I resorted to "none;slight_right" even though the usage of "none" is technically incorrect because there *is* a signed indication of a slight_right. But being incorrect that way seemed better than being incorrect by using "through;slight_right". On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 12:58 PM, David Mease <meas...@gmail.com> wrote: > > From the wiki: > > The *turn*=* key can be used to specify the *indicated* direction in > which a way or a lane will lead. It is used on the way segment from the > first indication via *road markings*, *signposts* or similar indications > to the junction or completion of merge. If you instead want to specify > legal turning restrictions please see the article about the restriction > relation <http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Restriction>. > > The turn:lanes schema is for identifying the painted/signed lane marking > arrows, not for describing where you can legally go from that lane. That's > what the turn restriction relation is for. > > Putting "through" on a lane means that there is a straight arrow painted > on it. Putting "none" on a lane means that there is no marking. > > On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 9:04 AM, Jack Burke <burke...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Even if the road isn't signed that way? The use of "through" when there >> is no explicit marking to that effect seems to be contraindicated by the >> wiki. >> >> Don't get me wrong--I don't see why we _couldn't_ use it when that is the >> obvious traffic direction, even with the lack of explicit signage. But if >> that's how we want to use "through" then shouldn't we update the wiki to be >> more clear? >> >> >> >> On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 10:58 AM, Paul Johnson <ba...@ursamundi.org> >> wrote: >> >>> On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 5:19 PM, Jack Burke <burke...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> An active OSM group (leaving names, etc. out while they check out what >>>> I reported) is running a script or plug-in or challenge called "to-fix" >>>> that is apparently supposed to help fix incorrect turn:lanes values (and >>>> maybe other things, I haven't investigated deeply enough). >>>> >>>> The problem is, it's breaking the values instead. I found a section of >>>> road that I'd added turn:lanes to in order to provide lane guidance at an >>>> exit. My original value of "none|none|none|none|none;slight_right" >>>> was replaced by "||||slight_right". >>>> >>> >>> You may want to try through|through|through|through|through;slight_right >>> as the value; I've noticed routers that actually use this data struggle >>> with null or none values, which isn't *entirely* unreasonable, but the >>> former does describe the allowed movements even if the DOT doesn't feel the >>> need to explicitly paint it out. >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Talk-us mailing list >> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us >> >> >
_______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us