[Tagging] traffic_signals:direction=* vs. direction=*
yopaseopor at gmail.com
Thu Mar 23 23:18:19 UTC 2017
On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 1:41 AM, Tod Fitch <tod at fitchdesign.com> wrote:
> “stop:forward=yes” & “stop:backward=yes” seem like they are putting a
> value in the key as the stuff to the right of the equals may never be
> anything other than “yes”. On the “lanes:forward” and “lanes:backward” keys
> at least the values carry variable values.
Sorry, but you are wrong if you are talking of "my idea" . I don't view any
future to a unique key for every traffic sign (would be interesting for
every group as a concatenation of pairs as: traffic_sign=warning
warning=bump), I see varied values. So as you can see with the example of
the proposal  , the result will not be stop:x = yes instead of
highway=stop >> kind of traffic sign in a unified scheme
traffic_sign:forward=ES:R2 >> Spanish code of the traffic sign (wil be good
for rendering the exact image)
side=right > side of the road it is.
> There is already a “traffic_signals:direction=forward | backward” usage.
> “stop:direction= forward | backward” and “give_way=forward | backward”
> would fit that schema too.
I think a scheme with the various values is more complete than create a key
for every traffic sign because then every traffic sign will fit in every
country with the same key, as you can see in Taginfo .
> Will it become forbidden to split ways on nodes with stop sign or traffic
> signal tags, because it breaks the information tagged on those nodes?
> To split a way specific in that node would not be the best option but the
only problem will be if you connect other way to that node, if you split a
way but you have the same direction in the two segments of a way I don't
think there will be any problem with that.Also you can split the way next
pixel of the pixel of the traffic sign.
Salut i senyals de trànsit (Health and traffic signs)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Tagging