[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - railway:signal:*:shape

Mateusz Konieczny matkoniecz at tutanota.com
Wed Apr 7 10:22:16 UTC 2021

Apr 2, 2021, 22:39 by eike at sf-mail.de:

> Am Freitag, 2. April 2021, 19:23:16 CEST schrieb Mateusz Konieczny via 
> Tagging:
>> oho, that is quite high level of detail :)
>> railway:signal:distant:shape=classic seems like something with different
>> meanings in different places in regions, and may even change over time
>> maybe find other value for that?
> I'm open for any better values. Actually the values in the table are just 
> examples on how things could look like, the actual values for each signal have 
> to be determined separately.
> The only thing we really make use of is the ETCS stop marker.
> What "classic" means would have to be determined per signal type. If it is 
> unclear a better name has to be found obviously. So a "classic" H/V light 
> signal would be something different then a "classic" Sr light signal.
Is there any name in use distinguishing old H/V from currently typical H/V?

Or is simply "classic" being used?

It would be nice to avoid problem in say in 15 years 
when traffic signal shapes will change again.

Ending with  "classic" value being used for shape not used at all anymore
and new "classic" shape being tagged somehow, but not as "classic" value

is long enough :)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20210407/58bc07ab/attachment.htm>

More information about the Tagging mailing list