[Tagging] Tagging speed camera *zones*
kieron.thwaites at gmail.com
Tue Jan 17 06:13:09 UTC 2017
> The UK has many "average speed" zones, which would have the same problem.
We've got average speed zones down here, with signage warning of them and
fixed, highly visible camera positions. As the cameras are fixed and
permanent, the enforcement relation fits the description perfectly well
(except for the fact that data consumers have to interpolate the zone from the
from/to nodes). Here is one that I mapped earlier this year.
I do share your opinion in that this all falls apart in enforcement zones
where the cameras are *not* in fixed positions: the enforcement relation
documentation explicitly states "This relation documents different kinds of
*permanently* installed devices..." (emphasis my own). Additionally, the
relation needs to have at least one "device" member to be valid,
notwithstanding other validation requirements.
What you're describing is what I'll term as "possible enforcement":
enforcement may or may not occur, and when it does, the locations of the
devices are random. There is currently no tagging scheme for this that I'm
aware of (so, congratulations, you get to come up with the proposal!).
Relevance and verifiability will probably be a strong point of debate, and in
this regard, I agree with Michael to an extent. If there is signage on the
ground denoting the possible enforcement zone, then it should be tagged. If,
however, there is no such signage on the ground, it probably shouldn't be
tagged, as such tagging will fail both verifiability and OSM's basic "tag
what's on the ground" guideline.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 6373 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the Tagging