I thing my reservations about this type of tagging is that this may be "tagging for the router". I still view the turn:lanes scheme as a (probably incomplete) way of describing complex intersections. Tagging simple intersections with this scheme just to get a routing engine to display the correct arrow icon is a waste of time. That data is already in OSM in the form of layout of the roads themselves. The router already knows there is a motorway with an exit node and a motorway link exiting at an oblique angle. The proper icon can be derived from this information. I think we would be better off waiting for the routing engines to get smarter than tagging every simple unmarked intersection with turn:lanes.
> On Aug 29, 2016, at 3:33 PM, Paul Johnson <ba...@ursamundi.org> wrote: > >> On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 2:05 PM, Jack Burke <burke...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > This exit has no turn lane. There is no staging lane prior to the exit >> > where tags could be placed, one should not be created just so that there >> > is a place to put tags. >> > This freeway should not be split. You said yourself that the exit is not >> > part of the freeway itself, so tags should not be placed on the freeway. >> >> That's not entirely true. The exit ramp technically begins in the middle of >> the far-right travel lane. If you were to imagine the highway as a train >> track instead, the exit ramp would have to physically connect to the rail in >> the lane. The same concept applies here, and although I've never actually >> asked one, I'll bet a highway engineer would agree. > > While not a licensed engineer or planner, my major was civil engineering and > my minor was transportation planning and I'm fairly familiar with the > applicable federal standards. Without going into semantics, that's actually > a very apt description. One of my mentors, Sam Baldock, also tended to take > into special consideration on highways he designed that all movements drivers > might reasonably try could be accomplished without having to make lane > changes more frequently than legally allowed. Essentially, consider how > crossovers are staggered in a railroad yard enforcing distances between track > changes. > > I wish Oklahoma did this, I've come across a few places in Tulsa where US and > State highways enter on one side of the roadway and exit on the opposite side > a very short distance later, meaning there's actually no way to stay on the > same route without making at least one illegal lane change (too close to > merge, exit or most recent lane change). > _______________________________________________ > 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
