[Talk-us] No right turn on red

[Paul Johnson]

Anthony wrote:

> On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 1:40 PM, Paul Johnson <baloo at ursamundi.org> wrote:
>> Owlman wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 5:39 PM, Anthony <osm at inbox.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 6:29 PM, Dale Puch <dale.puch at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> > I would have to side with not tagging them.  This is a timming restriction,
>>>> > not a navigation one.
>>>>
>>>> Navigation is not the only purpose of OSM data :).
>>>
>>> I think it may have a use for navigation; an algorithm to find the
>>> fastest route could prefer paths through intersections that allow
>>> right-turn-on-red over ones that restrict it.
>>
>> But this still doesn't address the problem of the defaults, which *do*
>> vary by region to region (such as only one other state allowing left
>> turn on red from a two way street, contra to the national default).  If
>> you have suggestions, please pitch in; since this also solves the
>> existing problem of all intersections with a stop sign or traffic signal
>> being restriction=no_u_turn by default.
>
> Use a tag on a boundary relation to define the defaults?

Argh, looks like someone sent a private reply to a public mailing list
(remember to use reply-to-mailing-list, NOT reply-to-author!).  Anyrate,
how do folks propose this be done?