For the direction of the sign, it would be nice to be able to use a 'virtual' node, then JOSM could calculate the bearing automatically. Maybe somebody should create a ticket so this becomes possible for all nodes which have direction.
How is this solved when 2 signs are on the same pole? Or 3 (this happens for those green signs for emergency gathering points, OK those aren't traffic signs. It may also happen for roundabout signs on very small roundabouts). Jo 2015-02-11 16:17 GMT+01:00 Sander Deryckere <sander...@gmail.com>: > I tried it a bit, and I do have some concerns with both the mapping plugin > and the style JOSM uses. > > First, I think that a traffic sign should only have tags like > > traffic_sign=BE:C21[7] > > and no tags like > > maxweight=7 > > Those legal implications of traffic signs should stay on way segments IMO. > So the stylesheet should try to recognise all traffic sign codes. Now you > can tag something like traffic_sign=BE:A1a + maxweight=7, and JOSM will > display a maxweight sign. Which isn't good. Splitting the tags completely > makes it possible to have some redundancy, and to check one tagset against > the other. > > Next to that, when we need to tag traffic signs, I would also like a way > to set the direction of a sign easily, and to be able to view the direction > easily. Certainly on physically split highways, some signs tend to be in > the middle of the road, so it's unclear how they're facing. At crossings it > can also be very ambiguous. We shouldn't have to fill in an angle by hand, > but with some hotkey+mouse action, JOSM could generate the right angle (and > maybe rotate the sign like it does for turn restrictions). > > Then I've always had problem with tagging variable speed limits (f.e. > those dynamic zone-30 signs). When mapping signs, there should be a clear > difference between the variable sign and the fixed sign, and that setting > should also apply to the tags on the way segments. > > Since we're tagging directions on road pieces too, allowing direction > signs (f.e. F29) should also be possible. > > And as a final general comment, when it comes to sub-signs and direction > signs, there are many free texts possible. This should also be made > possible next to the few defaults. > > > > Now, wrt the specific Belgian case, I've also seen a few mistakes, though > not that many, since the plugin isn't very usable before solving the above. > > C9 is translated to moped=no on the wiki, while it's mofa=no on the > plugin. I know the difference is very fuzzy (and the relation to class A > and B too), but we should at least use a uniform tagging. > > C23 is translated to goods=no on the wiki, and hgv=no on the plugin, > again, the difference is rather fuzzy. > > C24a and C24b are both tagged as hazmat=no on the plugin, again a > difference with the wiki, and I'm not sure what the hazmat_ADR_tunnel sign > is. > > Sign combinations (like C5+C7) also aren't available in the plugin. > > No-stopping signs are missing from the plugin, and no-parking signs have > no tags attached (parking:lanes:right=no would be the default tag I guess). > > The F1 sign (without buildings background) is deprecated and all need to > be replaced against June 1st (see > http://www.nieuwsblad.be/cnt/dmf20141120_01386508 as example), I don't > think the plugin will be production-ready against that time. So I don't > think it's worth to include the sign (at least not with that graphic). > > F9 should be translated to motorroad=yes instead of motorway=yes > > The F17 sign contains some strange defaults (conditional access > restrictions?) > > I didn't really check the validity of sub-signs, as I've often found > sub-signs very confusing in real life. > > Regards, > Sander > > > > 2015-02-09 1:15 GMT+01:00 Jo <winfi...@gmail.com>: > >> All they are good for is mark what is the 'ground truth'. Thereby >> showing, where the tags the ways got as a result, came from. >> >> For your noexit example. One would set >> >> traffic_sign=F45 exactly where the signpost is located. In that case the >> job is done. No need to tag a way (anymore. As far as I am concerned, this >> was different before, but then I'm probably one of those who misunderstood >> the noexit=yes tag). >> >> Now the way will only be connected on one end and the F45 or F45b >> confirms that that is correct. >> >> In case the validator complains about the loose node being very near to >> another highway, add noexit=yes on that node. noexit=yes now became a tag >> to make the validator shut up. >> >> >> So all the traffic_sign does, is create a redundant connection between >> what's on the ground and how it affects the way (and sometimes a node >> (traffic_calming) or a relation (turn_restriction)). >> >> Nothing more, nothing less. >> >> This is why they started doing it in Finland: >> >> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Finland:Traffic_signs >> >> Now I'm not saying we have to try and add all of them, but I do want to >> make it possible and conveniently easy to add them (and their effects). >> >> Jo >> >> 2015-02-09 0:26 GMT+01:00 André Pirard <a.pirard.pa...@gmail.com>: >> >>> On 2015-02-07 00:39, Jo wrote : >>> >>> 2015-02-07 0:09 GMT+01:00 André Pirard <a.pirard.pa...@gmail.com>: >>> >>>> On 2015-02-05 22:57, Jo wrote : >>>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> Over the past days, I adapted the data file for the road sign plugin >>>> for Belgium. >>>> >>>> I'd like to ask you to test it. >>>> >>>> Install the plugin the usual way and select something. Look at the top >>>> right corner of the tags pane on the right. A little icon was added there, >>>> press it and choose BE. >>>> >>>> Now it becomes easy to tag traffic signs and their effects on the ways >>>> they apply to. I'm going to ask the developers for some improvements, but >>>> it is functional already. >>>> >>>> >>>> Regarding tests, it's surprising. I click on the little icon but I see >>>> no "BE to choose". >>>> If I click Setting, I see several countries but not Belgium. >>>> >>>> >>> Call it wishful thinking, but what I want that plugin to do is the >>> following: >>> >>> 1. add the corresponding tags on the selected ways, which the sign >>> affects >>> 2. add BE:A1b or something of the kind on a node next to the way. This >>> node is placed where the actual sign is. >>> >>> It now becomes possible to see where the tags on the way came from, >>> call it a source, call it fuzzy, if that makes you feel better. I call it >>> redundancy and I don't see a problem with that. >>> >>> I need to see that in action, but, as I told you I don't see any >>> Belgian selection. >>> I'm running 7995. >>> >>> What I'm fearing with traffic signs is what happened and continues to >>> happen with noexit=yes. >>> noexit=yes does not indicate that one cannot exit but that a road >>> continuity gap that prevents passing is intentional. >>> It is made to warn QA tools that there's no error and maybe map browsers >>> to look at that location carefully. >>> But contributors started to use it otherwise. >>> They tagged it at plain dead ends just as totally uselessly as tagging >>> noexit=no in the middle of every street. >>> Or, as I removed some, at junctions with the obvious intention to >>> indicate a no passing condition on one of the streets, but without showing >>> which of the streets and even less how far, where in that street. >>> Worse, they tagged it on ways, not realizing that a node cannot be >>> identified by identifying a way (which end?). >>> Worse, some of them believed that it was made to tag the No Exit signal >>> (F45). >>> Worse, someone silently modified the Belgian Wiki >>> <http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Road_signs_in_Belgium#F45> to >>> instruct the Belgian community to do that F45 tagging. >>> Without warning, without discussion. No reaction from anyone. I >>> removed that. >>> >>> What I'm thinking is that the noexit=yes page is very easy to understand >>> and that if it is misunderstood so badly, there is a high risk that the >>> traffic_sign page which is far more complicated will be misunderstood even >>> more. >>> For one thing, that page says "Traffic signs give instructions or >>> provide information to road users". >>> That's true, but it forgets to say "The other tags provide instructions >>> to GPSes so that they can do the routing and give instructions or provide >>> information to road users". >>> The risk is to use only traffic signs and to have GPSes work very badly. >>> >>> Please note that I am not discussing the plugin but the habits that >>> starting to use road signs can induce. >>> In fact, I wonder what road signs are useful for if the conventional >>> tags do the same better and more fully. >>> >>> Cheers >>> >>> André. >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Talk-be mailing list >>> Talk-be@openstreetmap.org >>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be >>> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Talk-be mailing list >> Talk-be@openstreetmap.org >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be >> >> >
_______________________________________________ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
