[Tagging] Traffic sign direction tagging..

[Paul Johnson]

On Mon, Oct 1, 2018 at 4:24 PM yo paseopor <yopaseopor at gmail.com> wrote:

>  > ^ This is the problem.  The wiki says we are supposed to do something
>> like `traffic_sign:forward=US:R1`, and we can't really do that. A preset
>> needs to be based on a "toplevel" tag like `traffic_sign=*` not
>> `traffic_sign:forward=*` or `traffic_sign:backward=*` (remember seamark?
>> many of their tags have this issue too, where they put a value in the key
>> part, and so we can’t turn it into a preset).
>>
>
>  JOSM can do this change (when you change a way) as you can see on
> https://i.imgur.com/NnLpKWR.jpg
>  If you read taginfo you can find for forward subtags
> https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=%3Aforward more than 800000
> nodes. If you read taginfo for backward
> https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=%3Abackward you can find more
> than 800000 nodes. Are you saying iD doesn't recognise all these tags with
> forward and backward subtags?
>  I give you a solution: make two presets: one for traffic_sign:backward
> and other with the same values for traffic_sign:forward.
>

This brings up another issue i have with this forward/backward scheme.
Most traffic_signs are tagged where they stand.  They're not a member of a
way, just adjacent.  What now?


> > Describing what a driver might see when approaching a turn would be an
>> effective use of traffic_sign, but 'node near the way' is pretty useless
>> for routing. For maximal detail you'd need both, but if you're only going
>> to add one, the highway=stop is far more useful.
>>
>
> Best approach is to have the traffic sign "inside" the way because the
> traffic sign is relative to the way. If the way doesn't exist, traffic sign
> is useless, so it is better to map it as a node on the way. Also then you
> have the direction of the way to make relative the traffic sign to the
> direction of driving.
>

This makes sense for on-the-pavement markings, but doesn't really work for
way-adjacent objects.  See also: Why transit tagging is quite complex.


> > OSMand also warns of traffic calming, toll barriers, level crossing,
>> pedestrian crossings and enforcement cameras.
>>
>
> OsmAnd can show some traffic signs in certain moments or resolutions or
> guiding, as they do with maxspeed info.
>

And, weirdly, for tunnels (apparently just plain pulling a sign out of it's
butt for this, too, instead of using the regionally standard sign on
screen), even though it's bloody obvious that you're about to head into a
tunnel (of which there's like, 5 highway tunnels statewide for me, 4 of
which are newly open this month).  But not rumble strips, even though those
can be a critical hazard and are not easy to see before you hit them here.
Yes, this really bothers me because not having a warning in advance on
these invisible things is a bad thing consider that they're often brutal
enough to present the same hazard potential as a cattle grid to cyclists,
motorcycles and really light cars (in my pickup, not so much of an issue,
but still practically heart-attack inducing like a jumpscare out of
nowhere).
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20181001/86fd1ce9/attachment.html>