2017-03-16 5:13 GMT+01:00 Tod Fitch <t...@fitchdesign.com>: > The “direction” tag [1] has different uses that seem disjoint to me. > > 1. To specify the orientation (compass point or degrees from north) of > an object (adit or cave entrance, etc.). > > "orientation" would have been a better descriptor IMHO, but the crowd uses this tag differently (see taginfo, also subtags like roof:orientation, ...). Direction is working for me nonetheless.
2. To specify direction (clockwise/counterclockwise) around a roundabout > (not sure why this is needed as it should be apparent from local laws or > specified with a “oneway=yes”). agree with you 3. To indicate the direction (forward/backward) a stop or yield (give way) > sign has effect along a way. broken. From time to time people are coming up with features to tag on nodes that require (or seem to require) the information of a direction. Taking the direction of a different object (e.g. here a way) doesn't seem a healthy way to represent this. Ways might get split, might get reversed, nodes might be (or become) part of several ways, etc. Either use a cardinal direction or a short way stub or a relation, etc., but not "forward" or "backward" tag values on a node, it simply doesn't make sense. Tags should refer to the object they are tagged on. > Oddly, that third use seems only for stop and yield signs but not for > traffic signals where a “traffic_signals:direction=forward | backward” > tag is to be used. However that seems to be the most used form [2]. > Apparently some have figured that if we have “traffic_signals:direction” > there should be “stop:direction” [3] and “give_way:direction” [4] tags. > similarly broken I would keep the variant 1 and discourage 2 and 3. Cheers, Martin
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging