[Tagging] traffic lights

Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdreist at gmail.com
Wed Sep 7 10:40:06 BST 2011

2011/9/6 sergio sevillano <sergiosevillano.mail at gmail.com>:
> the present tagging schema means "this crossing is regulated by traffic
> lights"
> (highway=traffic_lights in the intersection node)
> the relation proposal connects all traffic lights of an intersection meaning
> the same thing
> "this crossing is regulated by traffic lights" and they are placed here.
> what  i was talking about is placing the tags at
> the nodes of ways that are affected by a traffic lights
> in more detail
> (no need for relations here)
> the approach is important
> if we map the physical traffic light signs
> then it will be chaos as this is solved differently by country.
> in this case the nodes should be alone (not in the way)
> at the side maybe...
> but i would not recommend to do this approach at all.

I want to point out that the frequently used tag is _not_
highway=traffic_lights but it is highway=traffic_signals. As the tag
is in plural this already suggests the more generalized way of tagging
a whole intersection instead of a single light. Opposed to this the
tag definition seems to contradict this interpretation: "A traffic
signal for regulating circulation." (otherwise this could have been:
"an intersection controlled by traffic lights").

Personally I am not against tagging single devices if one wants to do
this, but would prefer to do it with a different tag. Mappping single
devices might be interesting if on the same intersection the devices
have different features (think about traffic_signals:sound=* and other


More information about the Tagging mailing list