[Accessibility] Tagging traffic signals

[Alex Jurgensen]

Hi,

I found it.

Regards,
Alex,


On Feb 22, 2011, at 3:21 PM, Nolan Darilek wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> Hi folks.
> 
> Hermes, my accessible navigation platform, is getting far enough along
> that I'll likely soon be considering ways for its users to contribute to
> OSM rather than just take from it. To that end, I'm brainstorming
> accessibility-related tags and trying to arrive at some sort of
> consensus with anyone else who might be working in this space. One of my
> main goals with this project is to not create walled gardens, and to
> have my and others' data work well together. Since the subset of those
> of us wishing to use OSM accessibly is small indeed, it seems even more
> important to standardize on non-haphazard ways of representing
> accessibility features.
> 
> Since my platform is targeted at blind/VI travelers, and since I use it
> regularly, I'm focusing on my own pain points first. The biggest one is
> traffic signals. Basically, when I arrive at an intersection, I can tell
> that there is a light but have no clue whether or not there is a
> push-button signal and, as such, whether I am expected to use it.
> Furthermore, Austin in its infinite wisdom has a smattering of both
> audible and inaudible signals, and while I can generally identify wen
> crossing is safe, I lose time determining whether I should wait for an
> audible cue or should just go when it sounds safe to do so.
> 
> Does any method for tagging such features exist? If not, can we agree on
> one that works for everyone?
> 
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Disabilities#Blind.2FVisual_impairment describes
> acoustic="traffic_signals", but that kind of sucks IMHO. First,
> shouldn't it be inverted such that "traffic_signals" is the key and
> describes a set of possible values?
> 
> Next, this assumes that all traffic signals are audible. It doesn't
> convey the presence of a non-audible indicator that I may still be
> expected to press.
> 
> I realize that OSM is free-form and that I can just do my own thing, but
> I'd really rather try to at least standardize, especially since I'll be
> giving users tools to send edits back to OSM. So I suggest the
> following, and if folks like it then I'll update the wiki accordingly:
> 
> traffic_signal="audible" for a node representing an intersection with an
> audible signal
> traffic_signal="visual" for intersection nodes with non-audible signals
> 
> Are there any other signal types that I may have omitted? The above
> assumes that all signals are visual, which I suppose could be a flawed
> assumption. :)
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
> 
> iEYEARECAAYFAk1kRPUACgkQIaMjFWMehWKrkQCfe0kf+WGm0W9SLpiQgcTMJudx
> q+YAn3OmYWRJmnRn9fem5qArU2a5yzSG
> =avr0
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Accessibility mailing list
> Accessibility at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/accessibility
> 
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list send an empty email to accessibility-unsubscribe at openstreetmap.org