"My understanding of the detailed-intersection-tagging
norms was that this should have highway=traffic_signals on the stop
line for cars, and highway=crossing+crossing=traffic_signals on the
middle of the pedestrian crossing"
norms was that this should have highway=traffic_signals on the stop
line for cars, and highway=crossing+crossing=traffic_signals on the
middle of the pedestrian crossing"
Yes, this was actually exact that what were in my thoughts. But I think that not all mappers know that or follow that practice. So that's why my original purpose was to ban highway=traffic_signals + crossing=traffic_signals on the same node, but I know that's not possible and that's also what I don't want anymore to reach.
But what I see is, that we have to clarify much more WHEN, so in which case, highway=traffic_signals + crossing=traffic_signals on the same node should be seen as "accepted"/"good mapping practice" and in which cases not. I think it has to come more clear in the wiki that highway=traffic_signals + crossing=traffic_signals on the same node in NOT a "shortcut" or "mapping practice" for detailed intersection tagging/mapping.
Is it right tht we agree with that? So in which cases "highway=traffic_signals + crossing=traffic_signals on the same node" should be used? Only for the "crossing only-traffic lights" I mentioned?
--Lukas
Gesendet: Dienstag, 14. April 2020 um 15:43 Uhr
Von: "Jarek Piórkowski" <ja...@piorkowski.ca>
An: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools" <tagging@openstreetmap.org>
Betreff: Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - traffic_signals=crossing_on_demand
Von: "Jarek Piórkowski" <ja...@piorkowski.ca>
An: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools" <tagging@openstreetmap.org>
Betreff: Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - traffic_signals=crossing_on_demand
On Tue, 14 Apr 2020 at 06:23, <lukas-...@web.de> wrote:
>
> To response on the mentioning:
> "Currently the wiki page says "traffic_signals=crossing_on_demand makes
> it easy to mark all traffic lights which do only control a crossing",
> again I personally find highway=traffic_signals +
> crossing=traffic_signals sufficient for that"
>
> Yes, that's true. I agree with that, but my point is, that not only those traffic lights, which do control only a crossing, a mapped like this. Mappers use it just as a shortcut for traffic light and crossing, no matter in which relation between each other they are. That is not wrong, but it does not really show for what the lane traffic lights are "resposible". Please have a look at https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1339612951 and many many others in this city. The traffic lights of course control the crossing, yes, but they control the junction nearby, too.
> So looking at highway=traffic_signals + crossing=traffic_signals on the same node also makes it not possible to see only those crossings where n junction or something else is, as I see it at the moment.
Hm, that's tagging I haven't seen before. My suggestion would be to
not tag like that (the proposed new tag would suggest retagging of
this anyway). My understanding of the detailed-intersection-tagging
norms was that this should have highway=traffic_signals on the stop
line for cars, and highway=crossing+crossing=traffic_signals on the
middle of the pedestrian crossing - e.g.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1822620449 or
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/393547028
--Jarek
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
> To response on the mentioning:
> "Currently the wiki page says "traffic_signals=crossing_on_demand makes
> it easy to mark all traffic lights which do only control a crossing",
> again I personally find highway=traffic_signals +
> crossing=traffic_signals sufficient for that"
>
> Yes, that's true. I agree with that, but my point is, that not only those traffic lights, which do control only a crossing, a mapped like this. Mappers use it just as a shortcut for traffic light and crossing, no matter in which relation between each other they are. That is not wrong, but it does not really show for what the lane traffic lights are "resposible". Please have a look at https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1339612951 and many many others in this city. The traffic lights of course control the crossing, yes, but they control the junction nearby, too.
> So looking at highway=traffic_signals + crossing=traffic_signals on the same node also makes it not possible to see only those crossings where n junction or something else is, as I see it at the moment.
Hm, that's tagging I haven't seen before. My suggestion would be to
not tag like that (the proposed new tag would suggest retagging of
this anyway). My understanding of the detailed-intersection-tagging
norms was that this should have highway=traffic_signals on the stop
line for cars, and highway=crossing+crossing=traffic_signals on the
middle of the pedestrian crossing - e.g.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1822620449 or
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/393547028
--Jarek
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
