[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - traffic_signals=crossing_on_demand

[Paul Allen]

On Mon, 13 Apr 2020 at 17:43, <Lukas-458 at web.de> wrote:

> The second goal my proposal wants to message is to deprecate tagging
> "crossing=traffic_signals" together with "highway=traffic_signals" on the
> same node. Especially if you're saying this is a full crossing mapped. It
> breaks the highway=crossing - tagging scheme we use for all other types of
> crossing (except crossing=no). Some mappers use "crossing=traffic_signals"
> together with "highway=traffic_signals" on the same node als a shortcut for
> "lane traffic signal" and "foot traffic signal" because it is rendered as
> two traffic signals in JOSM. Or for mapping traffic signals for crossing
> cyclists. But I think in every case it is better to use two different
> (nearby) nodes for that.
>

Am I misunderstanding you?  You propose using two nearby nodes for
https://goo.gl/maps/3Sg5ndQ2ZCMBN9uy9  You can just see the yellow
pedestrian-control box at the left.  It controls the crossing (marked with
studs)
going from left to right across the picture.  The same lights that tell
motorists
to stop for pedestrians also control traffic flow at the T junction ahead.
The
same set of lights is both a highway traffic signal and a crossing traffic
signal.
This sort of thing is not uncommon in the UK, with the same set of lights
being used for both purposes.

-- 
Paul
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20200413/dae7829e/attachment.htm>