# Talk:Users:cmuelle8/multiple way tagging on single geometry

## Pictures?

Can we have some pictures to show how a particular junction could be mapped and tagged? For example, this one in the UK http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=yo1&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=York+YO1,+United+Kingdom&ll=54.071969,-0.91738&spn=0.000837,0.003334&t=k&z=19 It would show how each of the proposals compare in practice Seventy7 10:05, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Is this junction now correctly mapped in OSM? --Fabermichiel 19:39, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

## Criteria

Can we create a list of criteria that each of the proposals can be checked against?

For example

• It must be backwards compatible with highway=*
• It must be easy to use for newbies
• It must be routable
• It must allow for different kinds of parallel way. For example lane, verge, sidewalk, ditch, hedge, crash-barrier, lay-by and so on
• It must allow for features on the parallel ways. For example, a gate in the hedge running parallel with a road is not the same as a gate in the road itself and a small bridge over the ditch leading to the gate is not a bridge for the main way.
• It must allow for other tags on the parallel ways. For example width=* and surface=*

Seventy7 10:39, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

• It must define the order of the lanes (parallel ways), making clear whether a lane is left or right of some other lane.
This might seem obvious, but some simple proposed solutions such as cycleway/footway=left/right/both don't support it at all. --Tordanik 16:15, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
Oh, some more:
• It must be able to describe the physical layout of connections and junctions (examples: Is there a gap in the sidewalk "lane" where this highway=service connects to the road? Is the "new" lane at the transition between a two lane and a three lane segment added to the left or right of the existing lanes?)
• It must be able to describe the logical layout of a junction (such as turn restrictions for individual lanes)
These requirements are rather advanced. Most proposals seem to focus on the (relatively easy) task of describing parallel ways along a single way and ignore connections between those ways completely. --Tordanik 16:28, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

## "not convenient"?

IMO while these "parallel things as tags" proposals and discussions keep bubbling in the Wiki, me and some others have been just getting on and drawing the parallel ways as parallel ways. IMO it is in the end more convenient to see the objects side by side vs. interpreting a multitude of tags on single ways. Editor support can always be improved to streamline the processes, but it's not hard with the tools available today; when one is entering such finer details, the area being worked on is relatively small and can be tackled in short sections/smaller pieces if it otherwise feels like a too enormous task. Alv 17:06, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Can you link to some examples? I'm not sure that simply tagging ways is going to work either. Thanks. Seventy7 20:06, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
You could start browsing in central Helsinki here and continue north along the Mannerheimintie. Alv 12:22, 21 February 2010 (UTC)