<html><head></head><body><div style="font-family: Verdana;font-size: 12.0px;"><div>To response on the mentioning:</div>
<div>
<div>"Currently the wiki page says "traffic_signals=crossing_on_demand makes<br/>
it easy to mark all traffic lights which do only control a crossing",<br/>
again I personally find highway=traffic_signals +<br/>
crossing=traffic_signals sufficient for that" </div>
<div> </div>
<div>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 <a href="https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1339612951" target="_blank">https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1339612951</a> and many many others in this city. The traffic lights of course control the crossing, yes, but they control the junction nearby, too.</div>
<div>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.</div>
<div>
<div style="margin: 10.0px 5.0px 5.0px 10.0px;padding: 10.0px 0 10.0px 10.0px;border-left: 2.0px solid rgb(195,217,229);">
<div style="margin: 0 0 10.0px 0;"><b>Gesendet:</b> Dienstag, 14. April 2020 um 12:12 Uhr<br/>
<b>Von:</b> Lukas-458@web.de<br/>
<b>An:</b> tagging@openstreetmap.org<br/>
<b>Betreff:</b> Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - traffic_signals=crossing_on_demand</div>
<div>
<div style="font-family: Verdana;font-size: 12.0px;">
<div>Hi,</div>
<div>the difference would be that traffic signals which control a junction but a crossing too, can have buttons for pedestrians as well as traffic signals which do only control a crossing. At least here in Germany. With looking at button_operated, you cannot clear whether the traffic lights are controlling a crossng only and not a junction.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Soon I will add some photos you mentioned it would be a bit clearer maybe then.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Lukas</div>
<div>
<div>
<div style="margin: 10.0px 5.0px 5.0px 10.0px;padding: 10.0px 0 10.0px 10.0px;border-left: 2.0px solid rgb(195,217,229);">
<div style="margin: 0 0 10.0px 0;"><b>Gesendet:</b> Dienstag, 14. April 2020 um 11:03 Uhr<br/>
<b>Von:</b> "Volker Schmidt" <voschix@gmail.com><br/>
<b>An:</b> "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools" <tagging@openstreetmap.org><br/>
<b>Betreff:</b> Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - traffic_signals=crossing_on_demand</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>What's the difference between</div>
<div> </div>
<div>highway=traffic_signals plus button_poperated=yes</div>
<div>and</div>
<div>highway=traffic_signals plus traffic_signals=crossing_on_demand</div>
<div> </div>
<div>?</div>
<div> </div>
</div>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div class="gmail_attr">On Tue, 14 Apr 2020 at 02:55, Jarek Piórkowski <<a href="mailto:jarek@piorkowski.ca" onclick="parent.window.location.href='mailto:jarek@piorkowski.ca'; return false;" target="_blank">jarek@piorkowski.ca</a>> wrote:</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.8ex;border-left: 1.0px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left: 1.0ex;">On Mon, 13 Apr 2020 at 12:56, Paul Allen <<a href="mailto:pla16021@gmail.com" onclick="parent.window.location.href='mailto:pla16021@gmail.com'; return false;" target="_blank">pla16021@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br/>
> On Mon, 13 Apr 2020 at 17:43, <<a href="mailto:Lukas-458@web.de" onclick="parent.window.location.href='mailto:Lukas-458@web.de'; return false;" target="_blank">Lukas-458@web.de</a>> wrote:<br/>
>> 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.<br/>
><br/>
> Am I misunderstanding you? You propose using two nearby nodes for<br/>
> <a href="https://goo.gl/maps/3Sg5ndQ2ZCMBN9uy9" target="_blank">https://goo.gl/maps/3Sg5ndQ2ZCMBN9uy9</a> You can just see the yellow<br/>
> pedestrian-control box at the left. It controls the crossing (marked with studs)<br/>
> going from left to right across the picture. The same lights that tell motorists<br/>
> to stop for pedestrians also control traffic flow at the T junction ahead. The<br/>
> same set of lights is both a highway traffic signal and a crossing traffic signal.<br/>
> This sort of thing is not uncommon in the UK, with the same set of lights<br/>
> being used for both purposes.<br/>
<br/>
My understanding was that traffic signals=crossing on demand is meant<br/>
for things like <a href="https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2771622922" target="_blank">https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2771622922</a> (<br/>
<a href="https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/2oyFQXVHvy2r-XypCZTECg" target="_blank">https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/2oyFQXVHvy2r-XypCZTECg</a> ) however I<br/>
might be wrong? Or <a href="https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1416834957" target="_blank">https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1416834957</a> (<br/>
<a href="https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/DkuEFqSbOuQPGMtABsFFCA" target="_blank">https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/DkuEFqSbOuQPGMtABsFFCA</a> ) including<br/>
cyclists? (Esri is good for satellite imagery of these)<br/>
<br/>
Personally I find highway=traffic_signals + crossing=traffic_signals<br/>
on one node sufficient for these crossings.<br/>
<br/>
Currently the wiki page says "traffic_signals=crossing_on_demand makes<br/>
it easy to mark all traffic lights which do only control a crossing",<br/>
again I personally find highway=traffic_signals +<br/>
crossing=traffic_signals sufficient for that - maybe I'm missing<br/>
something. Of course any new tags can be proposed. But I would suggest<br/>
adding some real-world photos of crossings that would be tagged with<br/>
crossing_on_demand to the wiki page.<br/>
<br/>
--Jarek<br/>
<br/>
_______________________________________________<br/>
Tagging mailing list<br/>
<a href="mailto:Tagging@openstreetmap.org" onclick="parent.window.location.href='mailto:Tagging@openstreetmap.org'; return false;" target="_blank">Tagging@openstreetmap.org</a><br/>
<a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging" target="_blank">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging</a></blockquote>
</div>
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org <a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging" target="_blank">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging</a></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org <a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging" target="_blank">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging</a></div>
</div>
</div>
</div></div></body></html>