[OSM-talk-be] D1 road signal

[Glenn Plas]

On 01/16/2013 10:04 PM, A.Pirard.Papou wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The "Mandatory to follow the direction indicated by the arrow" 
> description for the down sloping D1 signals here 
> <http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Road_signs_in_Belgium> is 
> (fortunately) incorrect.  It should be "Drive around the obstacle on 
> the side indicated by the arrow".
>> Si le signal présentant une flèche non coudée, est placé sur un 
>> obstacle, il signifie obligation de passer du côté indiqué par la flèche.
> It's a real blunder of the Belgian highway code to make no distinction 
> between the horizontal (turn) and down sloping (drive around) arrow so 
> that very little people know the difference.  The roadworks personnel 
> know it very well, but yet I once saw such an arrow pointing to the 
> hole they were digging. Plonk.
>
> Cheers,

C3 is also wrong(and incomplete).  The sub-sign(onderbord) that defines 
the exception on the sign above it has a separate designation in the 
traffic code, see:

http://verkeerweb.be/verk_Tekns-Borden/onderbord.html#type4bijl2 but 
better is http://www.wegcode.be/wetteksten/secties/kb/wegcode/251-art68

According to the Wiki on road signs, and looking at how they work in 
Germany using road-signs plugin in JOSM ( 
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/JOSM/Plugins/RoadSigns )  It should 
be marked as such I think:

traffic_sign=BE:C3,BE:Type-IV

This should be done on a way, not a node next to the road(which marks 
the physical), when you do this on a way , then it is known what it 
applies to on that way, e.g the start and is known like this.  They come 
in pairs usually (but more is possible) marking a street(~=way) limits,  
there can be like 3 streets around a square regulating access to it of 
course.

Information gets lost as those different sub-signs are all the same.  No 
distinction is made.   Note, these are not the 'M' ones (white) ( 
http://www.wegcode.be/wetteksten/secties/kb/wegcode/248-art65#65.2 ) .  
Signs like 'Uitgezonderd plaatselijk verkeer', probably the most 
common.  So, the blue ones.

So they seem to make no distinction between an possible other blue 
subsign, marking an exception.  Tagging the way 'access=destination' is 
still fine of course, but when you want some meaningful road signs data 
-used in routing software and other customer-  the ones put on a way are 
far more useful.  A separate node (away from the way) marking the 
physical location of such a sign is of less value IMHO.

So Type-IV can be 'uitgz. bus' or 'uitgz. plaatselijk verkeer', etc.  
you don't know when parsing this OSM data, as there is no official 
distinction.

Glenn

Note, I'm using Type-IV out of sheer lack of precedents.  It could be 
T-IV, all lowercase, uppercase, no dash, whatever we agree on is fine.  
I'm probably did like 4 ways like that around the corner here, primarily 
to port the XML road sign definitions from the German implementation to 
a Belgian one, which is painstakingly progressing slow.





-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-be/attachments/20130116/1a086751/attachment.htm>