No way_name/destination with use lane

[freenerd]

I'm a bit unclear how type: use lane will actually be used.

It feels to me that name and destination only make sense, if they actually distinguish the lanes from each other. Since all lanes are on the same OSM way though, all lanes would have the same name/destination information. Thus we should not include that information in the text instruction, since it will be the same for all lanes.

We could re-introduce destination instructions if OSRM would support the destination:lanes OSM tag, ticketed here Project-OSRM/osrm-backend#2553 (comment) already

/cc @MoKob @daniel-j-h @bsudekum

[daniel-j-h]

UseLane will be emitted e.g. in Lane Anticipation: take this file as an example (search for "use lane").

Where you could take multiple lanes going straight but we constraint it to specific lanes, you'll get a UseLane with constraint lane data in the response.

This has no influence on the destination value, since a destination tag without lane namespace applies to the overall way and not to specific lanes.

The only way to find out: sample OSM for destination tags right in front of turns that have lanes attached.

[freenerd]

The only way to find out: sample OSM for destination tags right in front of turns that have lanes attached.

This is out-of-scope for osrm-text-instructions. Should I add that as a new issue on osrm-backend?

@daniel-j-h I take from your comment that the implementation in this PR makes sense?

[daniel-j-h]

I looked deeper into this, turns out there is a problem in OSRM during collapsing: the way we collapse steps could result in us emitting destination signs for (collapsed) steps later.

Ticketed in Project-OSRM/osrm-backend#3097.

[freenerd]

Merging this and will fix #42 later