On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 5:55 AM, Peter Wendorff
wrote:
> compass don't work if the way is rotated for some other reason.
You mean if the roadway itself is reconstructed? Then, no, it wouldn't work.
> But: forward/backward is easy to support by editors (as left/right is
> supported yet by JOSM e
Am 29.10.2010 03:17, schrieb Paul Johnson:
On 10/27/2010 11:47 AM, Peter Wendorff wrote:
Another point is: if forward/backward is used, a mapper can see with
common knowledge, that tagging a stop sign at the intersection node is
no good idea. Compass could in theory be tagged at the intersectin
On 10/27/2010 10:24 AM, Anthony wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 10:27 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
> wrote:
>> 2010/10/27 Anthony :
>>
>>> One proposal for mapping stop signs is that the stop sign always faces
>>> opposite the nearest intersection.
>>
>> so let's discuss about this. I don't think it i
On 10/27/2010 08:26 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> 2010/10/27 :
>> I have never seen a stop sign at a railroad crossing. Buses are required by
>> law to stop before a railroad crossing, and open the bus door so that the
>> driver can better hear if a train is approaching. Some other commerci
On 10/27/2010 11:47 AM, Peter Wendorff wrote:
> Another point is: if forward/backward is used, a mapper can see with
> common knowledge, that tagging a stop sign at the intersection node is
> no good idea. Compass could in theory be tagged at the intersecting
> node, too. It's possible and with re
On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 9:26 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
> really I don't see the point of this discussion anymore: I already
> question the benefit of tagged stop signs in general, as a stop sign
> itself requires very few seconds of travel time, while a unregulated
> crossing with a lot of tr
On 10/26/2010 09:17 AM, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 8:36 AM, Adam Schreiber
> wrote:
>> I think that 4-way and 3-way stops can be handled unambiguously by
>> highway=stop. More complex stops should probably be modeled with turn
>> restrictions.
>>
>> type=restriction
>> res
2010/10/27 Anthony :
> One proposal for mapping stop signs is that the stop sign always faces
> opposite the nearest intersection.
so let's discuss about this. I don't think it is a good idea to have
implicit facing, I would prefer to - at least in exceptional cases -
be able to define manually
I included rail"way" in my (unmentioned) definition of intersection - as
well as I would include rivers with lifting bridges etc.
regards
Peter
P.S.: Yes, that would have to be worked out in more detail to use it in
practise for generating the semantic connections
Am 27.10.2010 11:12, schrie
On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 9:14 AM, wrote:
> I have never seen a stop sign at a railroad crossing.
I have. They used to be quite prevalent. Now they're more rare, as
most places have installed active warning devices and gotten rid of
the stop signs.
Unfortunately, I don't remember exactly where
2010/10/27 :
> I have never seen a stop sign at a railroad crossing. Buses are required by
> law to stop before a railroad crossing, and open the bus door so that the
> driver can better hear if a train is approaching. Some other commercial
> vehicles routinely stop as well, but private vehic
uired to stop.
If there is a jurisdiction that places stop signs at each railroad crossing, I
would be interested in learning where it is.
---Original Email---
Subject :Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] stop signs
>From :mailto:ed...@billiau.net
Date :Wed Oct 27 04:12:23 America/Chicago 2010
On Tue, 26 Oct 2010 20:32:14 +0200
Peter Wendorff wrote:
> I don't see any situation, where a stop sign is used as a stop sign
> (and not for decoration) without an intersection near to it.
At a railway level crossing.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging
2010/10/26 Nathan Edgars II :
> On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 3:43 PM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
> wrote:
>> as already pointed out, I didn't intent literally "their real spatial
>> position" to indicate the stop itself, as this would only cause
>> problems (e.g. if the sign is hung above the road, is on both
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 3:43 PM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
> as already pointed out, I didn't intent literally "their real spatial
> position" to indicate the stop itself, as this would only cause
> problems (e.g. if the sign is hung above the road, is on both sides
> etc.), and the precise posit
2010/10/26 Nathan Edgars II :
> On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 2:16 PM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
> wrote:
>> 2010/10/26 Anthony :
>>> See attached. Do both streets have a stop sign, or does one street
>>> have two stop signs?
>> I'd say: bad mapping. Put the signs nearer to the road so it is clear
>> which r
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 3:19 PM, Peter Wendorff
wrote:
> Am 26.10.2010 20:35, schrieb Anthony:
>>>
>>> Perhaps you are right - but please, can you give me an example?
>>> I cannot imagine why there should be a stop sign without intersection.
>>
>> I'll try to get you an example, but first you have
Am 26.10.2010 20:35, schrieb Anthony:
Perhaps you are right - but please, can you give me an example?
I cannot imagine why there should be a stop sign without intersection.
I'll try to get you an example, but first you have to precisely define
"intersection" using words like "way", "node", "high
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 2:32 PM, Peter Wendorff
wrote:
> Am 26.10.2010 20:00, schrieb Anthony:
>>
>> Right, that's where the 99%/1% thing comes into place. I don't think
>> it's true that 100% of stop signs face opposite the nearest
>> intersection. So there has to be a tag for those exceptions.
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 2:32 PM, Peter Wendorff
wrote:
> Am 26.10.2010 20:00, schrieb Anthony:
>>
>> Right, that's where the 99%/1% thing comes into place. I don't think
>> it's true that 100% of stop signs face opposite the nearest
>> intersection. So there has to be a tag for those exceptions.
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 2:23 PM, Peter Wendorff
wrote:
> While I agree completely at avoiding relations, that's a hard task for the
> router.
> It's extremly much work to take in account data combined with the data you
> need only via the coordinates as source.
Node on the way, highway=stop, stop
Am 26.10.2010 20:00, schrieb Anthony:
Right, that's where the 99%/1% thing comes into place. I don't think
it's true that 100% of stop signs face opposite the nearest
intersection. So there has to be a tag for those exceptions.
Now, you could say that the tag is only needed for those exception
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 2:16 PM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
> 2010/10/26 Anthony :
>
>
>> See attached. Do both streets have a stop sign, or does one street
>> have two stop signs?
>
> I'd say: bad mapping. Put the signs nearer to the road so it is clear
> which road they apply to. Also probably
Am 26.10.2010 17:50, schrieb M∡rtin Koppenhoefer:
2010/10/26 Nathan Edgars II:
You'd probably need a relation to assign each stop sign to the street.
This seems like a lot of work for something so common.
no, you wouldn't need any relation and would give the work over to the router.
While I agr
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 2:16 PM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
> 2010/10/26 Anthony :
>> See attached. Do both streets have a stop sign, or does one street
>> have two stop signs?
> I'd say: bad mapping. Put the signs nearer to the road so it is clear
> which road they apply to.
So are we putting t
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 2:14 PM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
> 2010/10/26 Nathan Edgars II :
>> How would you handle this case? http://www.leevartanian.com/2008/07/02/alto/
>> It makes more sense to mark where you have to stop, not where the sign
>> telling you to stop is.
>
> I don't know the legi
2010/10/26 Anthony :
> See attached. Do both streets have a stop sign, or does one street
> have two stop signs?
>
I'd say: bad mapping. Put the signs nearer to the road so it is clear
which road they apply to. Also probably one sign would be sufficient
on the right side (in normal conditions
2010/10/26 Nathan Edgars II :
> How would you handle this case? http://www.leevartanian.com/2008/07/02/alto/
> It makes more sense to mark where you have to stop, not where the sign
> telling you to stop is.
I don't know the legislation there, but in the areas I know this sign
could be ignored b
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 1:36 PM, Peter Wendorff
wrote:
> Am 26.10.2010 16:50, schrieb Anthony:
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 10:45 AM, Nathan Edgars II
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 10:27 AM, John Smith
>>> wrote:
On 27 October 2010 00:17, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
>
>>>
Am 26.10.2010 16:50, schrieb Anthony:
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 10:45 AM, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 10:27 AM, John Smith wrote:
On 27 October 2010 00:17, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
What's wrong with something like highway:forward=stop or
highway:backward=stop for the node w
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 11:46 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
> 2010/10/26 Anthony :
>> On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 11:20 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
>> wrote:
>>> What about putting stop signs beside the way at their actual position?
>>> This would indicate the direction automatically (dependent if the
>
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 11:20 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
> What about putting stop signs beside the way at their actual position?
> This would indicate the direction automatically (dependent if the
> traffic is right or left-sided) and is error prone to direction
> changes of the way. Any pote
2010/10/26 Nathan Edgars II :
> On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 11:20 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
> wrote:
>> What about putting stop signs beside the way at their actual position?
>> This would indicate the direction automatically (dependent if the
>> traffic is right or left-sided) and is error prone to dir
2010/10/26 Nathan Edgars II :
> On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 11:20 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
> wrote:
> There are also places where you have to stop but there isn't a stop
> sign per se.
of course. You will have to stop if there are pedestrians crossing for instance.
> There may be STOP painted on t
2010/10/26 Anthony :
> On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 11:01 AM, wrote:
>> The amount of delay varies according to the traffic, particularly in cases
>> where one cross-street is not required to stop at the intersection. I have
>> encountered intersections where, at rush hour, you effectively can't ma
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 11:41 AM, Anthony wrote:
> If a way has to stop before approaching the
> intersection from one direction but not the other (relatively
> uncommon), you split the way.
Hmm, I guess that would be relatively common with small streets
crossing dual carriageways. Darn.
__
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 11:31 AM, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 11:20 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
> wrote:
>> What about putting stop signs beside the way at their actual position?
>> This would indicate the direction automatically (dependent if the
>> traffic is right or left-sid
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 11:20 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
> What about putting stop signs beside the way at their actual position?
> This would indicate the direction automatically (dependent if the
> traffic is right or left-sided) and is error prone to direction
> changes of the way. Any pote
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 11:01 AM, wrote:
> The amount of delay varies according to the traffic, particularly in cases
> where one cross-street is not required to stop at the intersection. I have
> encountered intersections where, at rush hour, you effectively can't make a
> left turn from the
What about putting stop signs beside the way at their actual position?
This would indicate the direction automatically (dependent if the
traffic is right or left-sided) and is error prone to direction
changes of the way. Any potential router could evaluate those in
preprocessing while building the
e the traffic on
the main road is continuous and the drivers don't choose to yield to the
side-street traffic.
---Original Email---
Subject :Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] stop signs
>From :mailto:o...@inbox.org
Date :Tue Oct 26 09:35:13 America/Chicago 2010
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 10:
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 10:45 AM, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 10:27 AM, John Smith
> wrote:
>> On 27 October 2010 00:17, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
>>> What's wrong with something like highway:forward=stop or
>>> highway:backward=stop for the node where one must stop?
>>
>> E
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 10:27 AM, John Smith wrote:
> On 27 October 2010 00:17, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
>> What's wrong with something like highway:forward=stop or
>> highway:backward=stop for the node where one must stop?
>
> Editors won't honour that sort of detail, so if the direction of the
>
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 10:26 AM, Adam Schreiber wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 10:17 AM, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
>> What's wrong with something like highway:forward=stop or
>> highway:backward=stop for the node where one must stop?
>
> How does that capture intersections where one of the roads
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 10:17 AM, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
> But a stop sign isn't a restriction; it has the main effect of slowing
> average speed. If our router is so precise that the seconds added by a
> stop sign count, it can easily calculate the nearest intersection to
> each stop sign node t
On 27 October 2010 00:17, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
> What's wrong with something like highway:forward=stop or
> highway:backward=stop for the node where one must stop?
Editors won't honour that sort of detail, so if the direction of the
way is flipped for what ever reason than the direction added
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 8:36 AM, Adam Schreiber wrote:
> I think that 4-way and 3-way stops can be handled unambiguously by
> highway=stop. More complex stops should probably be modeled with turn
> restrictions.
>
> type=restriction
> restriction=stop
> roles=from,to,via
But a stop sign isn't a
47 matches
Mail list logo
