[Tagging] More human readable values for traffic signs

Florian Lohoff f at zz.de
Mon Oct 26 10:53:27 UTC 2015

On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 02:38:37AM -0700, GerdP wrote:
> Mateusz Konieczny-2 wrote
> > I propose to add more like
> > - traffic_sign=oneway
> > - traffic_sign=no_stopping
> > - traffic_sign=no_parking
> I like the last two, I am not happy with traffic_sign=oneway.
> I fear that this might be used instead of tagging the corresponding
> way, on the other hand the position of the sign doesn't add much 
> information when the oneway=* tag is properly set. 

But still tagging as much signs as possible will help to at least
manually verify the data integrity. If there are oneway signs but
no street without a oneway there is definitly something wrong.

I am currently doing so with street lamps. Adding street lamps is
no replacement for lit=yes on the streets. Still the existance
of individual street_lamps shows the validity of a lit=yes on the

Florian Lohoff                                                 f at zz.de
      We need to self-defend - GnuPG/PGP enable your email today!
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 828 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20151026/1b01306d/attachment-0001.sig>

More information about the Tagging mailing list