The second goal my proposal wants to message is to deprecate tagging "crossing=traffic_signals" together with "highway=traffic_signals" on the same node. Especially if you're saying this is a full crossing mapped. It breaks the highway=crossing - tagging scheme we use for all other types of crossing (except crossing=no). Some mappers use "crossing=traffic_signals" together with "highway=traffic_signals" on the same node als a shortcut for "lane traffic signal" and "foot traffic signal" because it is rendered as two traffic signals in JOSM. Or for mapping traffic signals for crossing cyclists. But I think in every case it is better to use two different (nearby) nodes for that.
What do you think about it?
Lukas
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Gesendet: Montag, 13. April 2020 um 14:14 Uhr
Von: lukas-...@web.de
An: tagging@openstreetmap.org
Betreff: Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - traffic_signals=crossing_on_demand
Von: lukas-...@web.de
An: tagging@openstreetmap.org
Betreff: Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - traffic_signals=crossing_on_demand
Hi,
oh sorry you are confused. Maybe it's too much text I think. But your conclusion is completely correct, yes.
Gesendet: Montag, 13. April 2020 um 13:47 Uhr
Von: "Andrew Davidson" <thesw...@gmail.com>
An: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools" <tagging@openstreetmap.org>
Betreff: Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - traffic_signals=crossing_on_demand
Von: "Andrew Davidson" <thesw...@gmail.com>
An: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools" <tagging@openstreetmap.org>
Betreff: Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - traffic_signals=crossing_on_demand
I'm a bit confused by your proposal, but it would seem to me that what you want to do is add crossing_on_demand to the list of values for the key traffic_signals. Is this correct?
On Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 9:10 PM <lukas-...@web.de> wrote:
_______________________________________________Hi people,I made a proposal to reform the tagging of those traffic signals, which do only control a crossing. The proposal has two main messages: First that crossing=traffic_signals is every time a strict under-tag of highway=crossing and should not be used on the same node with highway=traffic_signals, because it makes the scheme of how we tag crossings (on nodes) inconsistent. The second is that it wants to add the value traffic_signals=crossing_on_demand as an under-tag of highway=traffic_signals, to mark for the lane-traffic that there is a traffic-signals-node whch does only control an "on demand" crossing. These sets of lane traffic signals often miss a green light because most of the time there is "default green". Also it would fit into the traffic_signals=* tagging scheme for specifying the "type" of a traffic signal.The link to the proposal is here: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/traffic_signals%3Dcrossing_on_demandI'm looking forward to your comments. Please (also) comment on the proposal's discussion page.Yours, LukasUser Lukas458
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
