[OSM-talk-be] D1 road sign

[A.Pirard.Papou]

On 2013-01-18 00:38, Ben Laenen wrote :
> On Friday 18 January 2013 00:07:19 A.Pirard.Papou wrote:
>> I did not say that your translation is bad and I don't blame you, I
>> meant that the explanation in the Belgian highway code is bad.
>> *Actually*, this sign
>> <http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Belgium-trafficsign-d1_downleft.sv
>> g>  and this sign
>> <http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Belgium-trafficsign-d1_downright.s
>> vg>  are the only (direction) ones placed on obstacles.  The blunder of the
>> code is that there should be two different IDs such as D1a and D1b, and
>> two explanations for two different meanings (turn left and go around). So,
>> what should be done is split the D1 row in two, move those two signs to
>> the second part and put each explanation in the correct part.
>> Who will do that?
>> Do you want it confirmed by a lawyer (source=)? I'd prefer.
> Why can't they have the same id. The traffic code is very clear about it. The
> definition of the sign is clear (see the bit of traffic code I quoted in my
> previous reply).
> Of course, that bit is not the only thing said about it in the traffic code.
> You'll have to read the "special placement conditions of traffic signs" as
> well. So there we have in article 10.1 the following text:
>
> "2° Wanneer een verkeersbord D1 met een niet-gebogen pijl wordt geplaatst op
> een hindernis of op een inrichting bestemd om het verkeer te leiden, dan moet
> deze pijl onder een hoek van ongeveer 45° naar de grond worden gericht."
>
> Translated: "When a traffic sign D1 with non-curved arrow is placed on an
> obstacle or on a facility to guide the traffic, then this arrow has to be
> placed at an angle of 45 degrees, pointing towards the ground."
> *D1. *Verplichting de door de pijl aangeduide richting te volgen.
> De plaatsgesteldheid bepaalt de stand van de pijl.
> Wanneer het verkeersbord dat een niet-gebogen pijl voorstelt, op een 
> hindernis geplaatst is, betekent het dat langs de door de pijl 
> aangeduide richting moet voorbijgereden worden.

What you are showing here is a Ministeriële omzendbrieven 
<http://www.wegcode.be/wetteksten/secties/omzendbrieven>M.O. 30-10-1998 
<http://www.wegcode.be/wetteksten/secties/omzendbrieven/mo-301098>
**
It's a text that must be not be read by the drivers but by the persons 
who place the signals.

I have talked to a lawyer and he confirmed that the code is incorrect 
because it says two different things to the driver (horizontal arrow) 
and to that person (sloping arrow).
And indeed, a signal that indicates to turn to the right or left should 
be a different signal than the signal to avoid an obstacle, which are 
two different rules.

>> The highway code has many blunders. The "no parking sign" with a 
>> double headed arrow is described as "no parking over a long 
>> distance". It's obviously meaningless to say "long distance" without 
>> saying how long and not to say *where* the interdiction applies. The 
>> correct definition is "... in front of the sign and behind it, up to 
>> a crossing or another signal. E1 explanation should add "behind the 
>> signal". One E1 in a GB parking lot was obviously placed to mean the 
>> opposite. 
>
>
> Again, it's all well described in the traffic code, but look further than just
> the definition of the traffic signs...
>
> You'll find nice rules like:
>
> (about the traffic signs about parking) "A traffic sign with an extra white
> sign with double black arrow has to be placed as a repetition sign if the zone
> where that rule applies is over 300 meters."
>
> There you have your "long distance", but there's nothing ambiguous about those
> arrows anyway: the rule starts where the arrow points upwards, and it ends
> where the arrow points downwards, and the double arrows are just in between as
> a repeater.
Again, the text you're showing is
Ministeriële omzendbrieven 
<http://www.wegcode.be/wetteksten/secties/omzendbrieven>M.O. 30-10-1998 
<http://www.wegcode.be/wetteksten/secties/omzendbrieven/mo-301098>
**
which is not for the drivers to read.
Same conclusion.
It's not a concern for the driver whether the distance is long or short 
but it is his concern that the rule applies before and after the sign, 
which the code does not say.

BTW, I have found road signs at  Image:Belgian road sign XXX.svg
and I've used 4 of them to fill the gap at A1a-d.
They're a tiny bit different (a bit shorter) but they are quite suitable.
Could the difference be compensated by specifying a slightly different size?

Best regards,

André.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-be/attachments/20130211/92ed6bba/attachment.htm>