Editing road geometry Australia

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
12 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Editing road geometry Australia

Petra Rajka - (p)

Hi everyone,

 

I’m Petra and I am part of the mapping team at Telenav.

Since January we started to work on road geometry in Canberra, Perth and Melbourne and we came across some intersections where roads (turn lanes) are mapped separately even where there is no physical divider or chevron markings.

 

See below two cases where we would simplify the geometry:

  • -32.0914374, 116.0129206
  • -35.3409195, 149.1616891

 

What’s your opinion about? What is the reason why turn lanes are mapped separately in these cases?

 

 


_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Editing road geometry Australia

Maarten Deen
On 2019-01-11 07:16, Petra Rajka - (p) wrote:

> Since January we started to work on road geometry in Canberra, Perth
> and Melbourne and we came across some intersections where roads (turn
> lanes) are mapped separately even where there is no physical divider
> or chevron markings.
>
> See below two cases where we would simplify the geometry:
>
>   * -32.0914374, 116.0129206

Is seen no big problem in how the roads are layed out there. Coming from
the motorway there is a clear divider where the offramp connects to the
Albany Highway.
I have more problems with the tags of the on- and offramp. They are
mapped as motorway when they should be mapped as motorway_link. The two
bridges in the on- and offramp are mapped as motorway_link.

> * -35.3409195, 149.1616891

Ways 77001149 and 77000891 should IMHO not be mapped like that but
mapped with turn:lanes.

Regards,
Maarten

_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Editing road geometry Australia

Markus-5
On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 07:40, Maarten Deen <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> On 2019-01-11 07:16, Petra Rajka - (p) wrote:
>
> >
> > See below two cases where we would simplify the geometry:
> >
> >       * -32.0914374, 116.0129206
>
> Is seen no big problem in how the roads are layed out there. Coming from
> the motorway there is a clear divider where the offramp connects to the
> Albany Highway.

<https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/596272469> and
<https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/596272466> form a double-rectangle,
but there isn't such a divider. I'd map that place like that:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:ID_Screen_Shot_from_-32.0914374,_116.0129206.png

> I have more problems with the tags of the on- and offramp. They are
> mapped as motorway when they should be mapped as motorway_link. The two
> bridges in the on- and offramp are mapped as motorway_link.

+1. I'd also delete the descriptions like Tonkin Highway Southbound
Ramp off to Albany Highway in the name tag unless the ramps are signed
like that on site.

> >       * -35.3409195, 149.1616891
>
> Ways 77001149 and 77000891 should IMHO not be mapped like that but
> mapped with turn:lanes.

+1

Regards

Markus

_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Jem
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Editing road geometry Australia

Jem
> I'd map that place like that: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:ID_Screen_Shot_from_-32.0914374,_116.0129206.png

I agree. And a supplementary question... would you also add a no-left-turn restriction from https://osm.org/way/581948344 at https://osm.org/node/5680879176? I would, and have done in the past. But to be honest, I'm not sure if a turn like that (having already passed the slip lane designated for the turn) is legal or not.

On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 20:47, Markus <[hidden email]> wrote:
On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 07:40, Maarten Deen <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> On 2019-01-11 07:16, Petra Rajka - (p) wrote:
>
> >
> > See below two cases where we would simplify the geometry:
> >
> >       * -32.0914374, 116.0129206
>
> Is seen no big problem in how the roads are layed out there. Coming from
> the motorway there is a clear divider where the offramp connects to the
> Albany Highway.

<https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/596272469> and
<https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/596272466> form a double-rectangle,
but there isn't such a divider. I'd map that place like that:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:ID_Screen_Shot_from_-32.0914374,_116.0129206.png

> I have more problems with the tags of the on- and offramp. They are
> mapped as motorway when they should be mapped as motorway_link. The two
> bridges in the on- and offramp are mapped as motorway_link.

+1. I'd also delete the descriptions like Tonkin Highway Southbound
Ramp off to Albany Highway in the name tag unless the ramps are signed
like that on site.

> >       * -35.3409195, 149.1616891
>
> Ways 77001149 and 77000891 should IMHO not be mapped like that but
> mapped with turn:lanes.

+1

Regards

Markus

_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Editing road geometry Australia

Markus-5
On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 13:23, Jem <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> I agree. And a supplementary question... would you also add a no-left-turn restriction from https://osm.org/way/581948344 at https://osm.org/node/5680879176? I would, and have done in the past. But to be honest, I'm not sure if a turn like that (having already passed the slip lane designated for the turn) is legal or not.

I would only add a no-left-turn restriction if there is a sign on site.

A routing app would likely not lead via this node onto the motorway
anyway, since <https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/174313928> is the
more direct way.

_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Editing road geometry Australia

Maarten Deen
In reply to this post by Jem
I agree that Markus' solution is more elegant (and I was more looking to
the offramp itself). I would normally also map it like that but I also
don't go out of my way to correct situations like that.
The way it is mapped now is more organic, more as you would actually
drive. As such I don't see it as wrong.

I would not add a turn restriction. For routers it is useless because
you never get that route anyway.

Regards,
Maarten

On 2019-01-11 13:23, Jem wrote:

>> I'd map that place like that:
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:ID_Screen_Shot_from_-32.0914374,_116.0129206.png
>
> I agree. And a supplementary question... would you also add a
> no-left-turn restriction from https://osm.org/way/581948344 at
> https://osm.org/node/5680879176? I would, and have done in the past.
> But to be honest, I'm not sure if a turn like that (having already
> passed the slip lane designated for the turn) is legal or not.
>
> On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 20:47, Markus <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 07:40, Maarten Deen <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 2019-01-11 07:16, Petra Rajka - (p) wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> See below two cases where we would simplify the geometry:
>>>>
>>>>       * -32.0914374, 116.0129206
>>>
>>> Is seen no big problem in how the roads are layed out there.
>> Coming from
>>> the motorway there is a clear divider where the offramp connects
>> to the
>>> Albany Highway.
>>
>> <https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/596272469> and
>> <https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/596272466> form a
>> double-rectangle,
>> but there isn't such a divider. I'd map that place like that:
>>
>>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:ID_Screen_Shot_from_-32.0914374,_116.0129206.png
>>
>>> I have more problems with the tags of the on- and offramp. They
>> are
>>> mapped as motorway when they should be mapped as motorway_link.
>> The two
>>> bridges in the on- and offramp are mapped as motorway_link.
>>
>> +1. I'd also delete the descriptions like Tonkin Highway Southbound
>> Ramp off to Albany Highway in the name tag unless the ramps are
>> signed
>> like that on site.
>>
>>>>       * -35.3409195, 149.1616891
>>>
>>> Ways 77001149 and 77000891 should IMHO not be mapped like that but
>>> mapped with turn:lanes.
>>
>> +1
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Markus
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> talk mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
> _______________________________________________
> talk mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Editing road geometry Australia

Marc Gemis
If you miss the on-ramp and are waiting for the traffic signals, a
router can recalculate the route in the meantime and still try to let
you turn left at the traffic signals.

m.

On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 1:47 PM Maarten Deen <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> I agree that Markus' solution is more elegant (and I was more looking to
> the offramp itself). I would normally also map it like that but I also
> don't go out of my way to correct situations like that.
> The way it is mapped now is more organic, more as you would actually
> drive. As such I don't see it as wrong.
>
> I would not add a turn restriction. For routers it is useless because
> you never get that route anyway.
>
> Regards,
> Maarten
>
> On 2019-01-11 13:23, Jem wrote:
> >> I'd map that place like that:
> > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:ID_Screen_Shot_from_-32.0914374,_116.0129206.png
> >
> > I agree. And a supplementary question... would you also add a
> > no-left-turn restriction from https://osm.org/way/581948344 at
> > https://osm.org/node/5680879176? I would, and have done in the past.
> > But to be honest, I'm not sure if a turn like that (having already
> > passed the slip lane designated for the turn) is legal or not.
> >
> > On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 20:47, Markus <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 07:40, Maarten Deen <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On 2019-01-11 07:16, Petra Rajka - (p) wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>> See below two cases where we would simplify the geometry:
> >>>>
> >>>>       * -32.0914374, 116.0129206
> >>>
> >>> Is seen no big problem in how the roads are layed out there.
> >> Coming from
> >>> the motorway there is a clear divider where the offramp connects
> >> to the
> >>> Albany Highway.
> >>
> >> <https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/596272469> and
> >> <https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/596272466> form a
> >> double-rectangle,
> >> but there isn't such a divider. I'd map that place like that:
> >>
> >>
> > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:ID_Screen_Shot_from_-32.0914374,_116.0129206.png
> >>
> >>> I have more problems with the tags of the on- and offramp. They
> >> are
> >>> mapped as motorway when they should be mapped as motorway_link.
> >> The two
> >>> bridges in the on- and offramp are mapped as motorway_link.
> >>
> >> +1. I'd also delete the descriptions like Tonkin Highway Southbound
> >> Ramp off to Albany Highway in the name tag unless the ramps are
> >> signed
> >> like that on site.
> >>
> >>>>       * -35.3409195, 149.1616891
> >>>
> >>> Ways 77001149 and 77000891 should IMHO not be mapped like that but
> >>> mapped with turn:lanes.
> >>
> >> +1
> >>
> >> Regards
> >>
> >> Markus
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> talk mailing list
> >> [hidden email]
> >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
> > _______________________________________________
> > talk mailing list
> > [hidden email]
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
> _______________________________________________
> talk mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Editing road geometry Australia

Petra Rajka - (p)
On this post you can find an image about how we would edit these cases: https://github.com/TelenavMapping/AU-NZ_mapping_projects/issues/5

Regards,
Petra
-----Original Message-----
From: Marc Gemis <[hidden email]>
Sent: Friday, January 11, 2019 2:51 PM
To: Maarten Deen <[hidden email]>
Cc: <[hidden email]> <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Editing road geometry Australia

If you miss the on-ramp and are waiting for the traffic signals, a router can recalculate the route in the meantime and still try to let you turn left at the traffic signals.

m.

On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 1:47 PM Maarten Deen <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> I agree that Markus' solution is more elegant (and I was more looking
> to the offramp itself). I would normally also map it like that but I
> also don't go out of my way to correct situations like that.
> The way it is mapped now is more organic, more as you would actually
> drive. As such I don't see it as wrong.
>
> I would not add a turn restriction. For routers it is useless because
> you never get that route anyway.
>
> Regards,
> Maarten
>
> On 2019-01-11 13:23, Jem wrote:
> >> I'd map that place like that:
> > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:ID_Screen_Shot_from_-32.091
> > 4374,_116.0129206.png
> >
> > I agree. And a supplementary question... would you also add a
> > no-left-turn restriction from
> > https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fosm.org%2fway%2f
> > 581948344&c=E,1,W8BdLprvnr_q3VoE2HKm-GlIytkKYQULG3mOBHiBI8vG2y5JXAoN
> > LEY8-fMtwYvRkBnGK0ch4-IOcbB3wzWup37kJNoeevnkcy6X0VuERw,,&typo=1 at
> > https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fosm.org%2fnode%2f5680879176&c=E,1,ZxAUpmFrwYlftR9DaOw1l5vhNAXqhinLqXEffS-6crFbK-1zCIBJ5LeOZYHo8m0zosxwukjDFb90XhhDZf5gTIPak1Wh1_nyaqJLJ6dQrUMx7UXqf3d6b8pFnw,,&typo=1 I would, and have done in the past.
> > But to be honest, I'm not sure if a turn like that (having already
> > passed the slip lane designated for the turn) is legal or not.
> >
> > On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 20:47, Markus <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 07:40, Maarten Deen <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On 2019-01-11 07:16, Petra Rajka - (p) wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>> See below two cases where we would simplify the geometry:
> >>>>
> >>>>       * -32.0914374, 116.0129206
> >>>
> >>> Is seen no big problem in how the roads are layed out there.
> >> Coming from
> >>> the motorway there is a clear divider where the offramp connects
> >> to the
> >>> Albany Highway.
> >>
> >> <https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/596272469> and
> >> <https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/596272466> form a
> >> double-rectangle, but there isn't such a divider. I'd map that
> >> place like that:
> >>
> >>
> > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:ID_Screen_Shot_from_-32.091
> > 4374,_116.0129206.png
> >>
> >>> I have more problems with the tags of the on- and offramp. They
> >> are
> >>> mapped as motorway when they should be mapped as motorway_link.
> >> The two
> >>> bridges in the on- and offramp are mapped as motorway_link.
> >>
> >> +1. I'd also delete the descriptions like Tonkin Highway Southbound
> >> Ramp off to Albany Highway in the name tag unless the ramps are
> >> signed like that on site.
> >>
> >>>>       * -35.3409195, 149.1616891
> >>>
> >>> Ways 77001149 and 77000891 should IMHO not be mapped like that but
> >>> mapped with turn:lanes.
> >>
> >> +1
> >>
> >> Regards
> >>
> >> Markus
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> talk mailing list
> >> [hidden email]
> >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
> > _______________________________________________
> > talk mailing list
> > [hidden email]
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
> _______________________________________________
> talk mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Jem
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Editing road geometry Australia

Jem
In reply to this post by Marc Gemis
Spot on. Although the routing engine data could impose a turn restriction here based upon geometry as part of their data pipeline.  

I wonder if it is legal to turn there and, if not, does that form part of the ground truth IRT OSM, regardless of whether there is a sign present.


On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 22:53, Marc Gemis <[hidden email]> wrote:
If you miss the on-ramp and are waiting for the traffic signals, a
router can recalculate the route in the meantime and still try to let
you turn left at the traffic signals.

m.

On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 1:47 PM Maarten Deen <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> I agree that Markus' solution is more elegant (and I was more looking to
> the offramp itself). I would normally also map it like that but I also
> don't go out of my way to correct situations like that.
> The way it is mapped now is more organic, more as you would actually
> drive. As such I don't see it as wrong.
>
> I would not add a turn restriction. For routers it is useless because
> you never get that route anyway.
>
> Regards,
> Maarten
>
> On 2019-01-11 13:23, Jem wrote:
> >> I'd map that place like that:
> > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:ID_Screen_Shot_from_-32.0914374,_116.0129206.png
> >
> > I agree. And a supplementary question... would you also add a
> > no-left-turn restriction from https://osm.org/way/581948344 at
> > https://osm.org/node/5680879176? I would, and have done in the past.
> > But to be honest, I'm not sure if a turn like that (having already
> > passed the slip lane designated for the turn) is legal or not.
> >
> > On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 20:47, Markus <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 07:40, Maarten Deen <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On 2019-01-11 07:16, Petra Rajka - (p) wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>> See below two cases where we would simplify the geometry:
> >>>>
> >>>>       * -32.0914374, 116.0129206
> >>>
> >>> Is seen no big problem in how the roads are layed out there.
> >> Coming from
> >>> the motorway there is a clear divider where the offramp connects
> >> to the
> >>> Albany Highway.
> >>
> >> <https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/596272469> and
> >> <https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/596272466> form a
> >> double-rectangle,
> >> but there isn't such a divider. I'd map that place like that:
> >>
> >>
> > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:ID_Screen_Shot_from_-32.0914374,_116.0129206.png
> >>
> >>> I have more problems with the tags of the on- and offramp. They
> >> are
> >>> mapped as motorway when they should be mapped as motorway_link.
> >> The two
> >>> bridges in the on- and offramp are mapped as motorway_link.
> >>
> >> +1. I'd also delete the descriptions like Tonkin Highway Southbound
> >> Ramp off to Albany Highway in the name tag unless the ramps are
> >> signed
> >> like that on site.
> >>
> >>>>       * -35.3409195, 149.1616891
> >>>
> >>> Ways 77001149 and 77000891 should IMHO not be mapped like that but
> >>> mapped with turn:lanes.
> >>
> >> +1
> >>
> >> Regards
> >>
> >> Markus
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> talk mailing list
> >> [hidden email]
> >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
> > _______________________________________________
> > talk mailing list
> > [hidden email]
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
> _______________________________________________
> talk mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Editing road geometry Australia

Warin
A left turn there would be legal, unless there is a local sign.
So I would not place a turn restriction on it base on satellite imagery.



On 12/01/19 07:47, Jem wrote:
Spot on. Although the routing engine data could impose a turn restriction here based upon geometry as part of their data pipeline.  

I wonder if it is legal to turn there and, if not, does that form part of the ground truth IRT OSM, regardless of whether there is a sign present.


On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 22:53, Marc Gemis <[hidden email]> wrote:
If you miss the on-ramp and are waiting for the traffic signals, a
router can recalculate the route in the meantime and still try to let
you turn left at the traffic signals.

m.

On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 1:47 PM Maarten Deen <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> I agree that Markus' solution is more elegant (and I was more looking to
> the offramp itself). I would normally also map it like that but I also
> don't go out of my way to correct situations like that.
> The way it is mapped now is more organic, more as you would actually
> drive. As such I don't see it as wrong.
>
> I would not add a turn restriction. For routers it is useless because
> you never get that route anyway.
>
> Regards,
> Maarten
>
> On 2019-01-11 13:23, Jem wrote:
> >> I'd map that place like that:
> > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:ID_Screen_Shot_from_-32.0914374,_116.0129206.png
> >
> > I agree. And a supplementary question... would you also add a
> > no-left-turn restriction from https://osm.org/way/581948344 at
> > https://osm.org/node/5680879176? I would, and have done in the past.
> > But to be honest, I'm not sure if a turn like that (having already
> > passed the slip lane designated for the turn) is legal or not.
> >
> > On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 20:47, Markus <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 07:40, Maarten Deen <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On 2019-01-11 07:16, Petra Rajka - (p) wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>> See below two cases where we would simplify the geometry:
> >>>>
> >>>>       * -32.0914374, 116.0129206
> >>>
> >>> Is seen no big problem in how the roads are layed out there.
> >> Coming from
> >>> the motorway there is a clear divider where the offramp connects
> >> to the
> >>> Albany Highway.
> >>
> >> <https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/596272469> and
> >> <https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/596272466> form a
> >> double-rectangle,
> >> but there isn't such a divider. I'd map that place like that:
> >>
> >>
> > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:ID_Screen_Shot_from_-32.0914374,_116.0129206.png
> >>
> >>> I have more problems with the tags of the on- and offramp. They
> >> are
> >>> mapped as motorway when they should be mapped as motorway_link.
> >> The two
> >>> bridges in the on- and offramp are mapped as motorway_link.
> >>
> >> +1. I'd also delete the descriptions like Tonkin Highway Southbound
> >> Ramp off to Albany Highway in the name tag unless the ramps are
> >> signed
> >> like that on site.
> >>
> >>>>       * -35.3409195, 149.1616891
> >>>
> >>> Ways 77001149 and 77000891 should IMHO not be mapped like that but
> >>> mapped with turn:lanes.
> >>
> >> +1
> >>
> >> Regards
> >>
> >> Markus


_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Editing road geometry Australia

Warin
In reply to this post by Markus-5
On 11/01/19 21:45, Markus wrote:

> On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 07:40, Maarten Deen <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> On 2019-01-11 07:16, Petra Rajka - (p) wrote:
>>
>>> See below two cases where we would simplify the geometry:
>>>
>>>        * -32.0914374, 116.0129206
>> Is seen no big problem in how the roads are layed out there. Coming from
>> the motorway there is a clear divider where the offramp connects to the
>> Albany Highway.
> <https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/596272469> and
> <https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/596272466> form a double-rectangle,
> but there isn't such a divider. I'd map that place like that:
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:ID_Screen_Shot_from_-32.0914374,_116.0129206.png
>
>> I have more problems with the tags of the on- and offramp. They are
>> mapped as motorway when they should be mapped as motorway_link. The two
>> bridges in the on- and offramp are mapped as motorway_link.
> +1. I'd also delete the descriptions like Tonkin Highway Southbound
> Ramp off to Albany Highway in the name tag unless the ramps are signed
> like that on site.
>
>>>        * -35.3409195, 149.1616891
>> Ways 77001149 and 77000891 should IMHO not be mapped like that but
>> mapped with turn:lanes.
> +1
>
-1

I disagree. But then I could be wrong.

In the above (Canberra) example:

Where a solid line exists between the two groups of lanes there is a
'legal barrier' that you cannot legally cross between the two groups of
lanes (2 go right and 2 continues

  straight on).

Using the tag lanes does not convey this 'legal barrier'.

Also using the tag lanes how can the turn restrictions that exist be
tagged, the right 2 must turn right and the left 2 must go straight on ?

Note: this is also raised on the Australian list too.. so I have said the same thing there too.


_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Editing road geometry Australia

Maarten Deen
On 2019-01-11 23:15, Warin wrote:
> On 11/01/19 21:45, Markus wrote:
>> On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 07:40, Maarten Deen <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> On 2019-01-11 07:16, Petra Rajka - (p) wrote:

>>>>        * -35.3409195, 149.1616891
>>> Ways 77001149 and 77000891 should IMHO not be mapped like that but
>>> mapped with turn:lanes.
>> +1
>>
> -1
>
> I disagree. But then I could be wrong.
>
> In the above (Canberra) example:
>
> Where a solid line exists between the two groups of lanes there is a
> 'legal barrier' that you cannot legally cross between the two groups of
> lanes (2 go right and 2 continues

But solid lines (single and double) used in the sense of "not allowed to
pass" or "not allowed to change lanes" are used everywhere over the
whole world.
I'm sure you're not suggesting that this [1] road should be mapped as
two seperate ways? Then why would we map other roads with no physical
divider as two seperate ways?

[1]
<https://www.google.nl/maps/@51.4313146,5.7421874,3a,75y,318.25h,88.15t/data=!3m5!1e1!3m3!1sYKLDgYrrbp4KJZFp1iqXsw!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo1.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DYKLDgYrrbp4KJZFp1iqXsw%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D15.575244%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100>

> Also using the tag lanes how can the turn restrictions that exist be
> tagged, the right 2 must turn right and the left 2 must go straight on
> ?

turn:lanes=right|right|straight|straight

Regards,
Maarten

_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk