Overlooking the discussion so far, I think exit_to cannot be deprecated. However, there's strong feelings to support both destination and exit_to. In my opinion, the following things can be done:
1. keep things the way they are now (where exit_to is the preffered choice, because the text on the motorway_junction page states that it should be used). The disadvantages of exit_to are not solved: a. no description of exit_to b. no solution of the exit_to_left yet to support both branches c. not clear why other items of a exit ramp are not used in the motorway_junction tag (like lanes, maxspeed) d. no support for advanced lanes tagging to summarize: no support for a lane assistant 2. deprecate destination disadvantage the same as above, so no support for a lane assistant 3. deprecate exit_to several U.S. OSM'ers do want to keep on using exit_to Possible solution in this discussion. The non-U.S. OSM'ers in this discussion seem to favour destination. The U.S. OSM'ers seem to favour exit_to. Lets split it in the text of motorway_junction tag. I do have a text suggestion for that. Please send your thoughts on this. You can see I also try to adress the realtion discussion, which I think can be handy, but I don't see the value for motorway exit tagging. Destination can do the trick there, and a relation is more complex = less KISS Destination The tags destination <http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:destination>=* , destination:ref <http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:destination:ref> =* (according to information on road signs) and *lanes*=* should be used on the ways directly after the exit. The tag destination:lanes<http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:destination> =* can be used on complex motorway_junctions. These tags are needed to support a lane assistant in navigation devices. In the United States exit_to<http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:exit_to> =* on the motorway_junction node should be used to detail the destinations where the junction exits to. The tag Relation:destination_sign<http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:destination_sign> can be used in non-motorway situations. This part of the exit_to will in my text suggestion be moved to the exit_to Wiki page: —for example, if signage states a road leads to Anytown on the A1000… exit_to <http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:exit_to>=Anytown A1000<http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Tag:exit_to%3DAnytown_A1000&action=edit&redlink=1>; if multiple destinations are shown on signage, tag them with semicolons: for example, exit_to <http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:exit_to>=Anytown A1000; Elsewhere A1001; Anyvillage<http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Tag:exit_to%3DAnytown_A1000;_Elsewhere_A1001;_Anyvillage&action=edit&redlink=1>; note that Anyvillage doesn't have a ref number. 2012/11/21 Colin Smale <colin.sm...@xs4all.nl> > Using only exit_to there is no way to handle junction topologies other > than a straightforward highway exit, where there is one "big" through road > and one "small" road leaving. What about wrong-side exits? Or where the > highway splits into two (or more) roads of equal importance? > > Destination tagging is used a lot in the Netherlands, placed on the first > segment of each way *after* the node where they split. My Garmin warns me > ahead of time which side to keep to, so there doesn't seem to be a need to > start the tagging at the first sign (which may be 1km or more before the > actual junction). I have not yet found a case where adding destination=* > around a junction felt like the wrong thing to do. > > IMHO destination=* on the ways is the right balance between the > rudimentary exit_to on the node and using a relation which will have > problems with support/adoption by both mappers and toolmakers. > > Colin > > > I don't see any reason to deprecate exit_to, it seems to be the simplest > > method of mapping a destination sign on a motorway junction or similar > > exit. I use exit_to fairly frequently and it has been a documented tag > > for a while (although on the motorway junction page rather than it's own > > page) and is also used in JOSM presets. > > > > I feel it is a less ambiguous tag than destination (as a tag on a way) > > as it shows the specific point where a destination is signed, unlike > > destination tagged on a way. If you use destination as a tag on a way > > then I think you'd need to be sure that at every point along that way > > the destination(s) given is the same throughout and if not or you didn't > > know you'd need to split the way. The Taginfo stats also seem to show > > that exit_to is the most popular of the three different ways of mapping > > destinations: a destination relation, exit_to on a junction node, or > > destination as a tag on a way. > > > > A destination relation is also a clear way of mapping a destination as > > the intersection and both the 'from' and 'to' ways are part of the > > relation, and is particularly useful in mapping situations where exit_to > > wouldn't work (like at a crossroads) so I do also use this method. It is > > however more complex (and so is unlikely to be a method that a new > > mapper would be able to use) particularly where there are multiple > > destinations given on a sign which requires a relation for each > > destination. > > > > Cheers, > > Paul Williams > > (Paul The Archivist) > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Tagging mailing list > > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
