On 28/09/18 22:58, Philip Barnes wrote: > > > On 28 September 2018 22:14:03 BST, Simon Poole <si...@poole.ch> wrote: >> >> >> Am 28.09.2018 um 18:07 schrieb Bryan Housel: >>>> I actually mentioned the issue in Milano. >>>> >>>> Essentially `traffic_sign`, `traffic_sign:forward` and >>>> `traffic_sign:backward` need to be treated as "object" tags as >> things >>>> are now. >>>> >>> Let’s just do `traffic_sign=*` and consider the others an unfortunate >>> mistake that can go away. >> There are a total of 37'000 forward / backward variants that would have >> to be migrated to traffic_sign + a suitable sub tag, not an awful lot >> in the grand scheme of things, but needs to be done. > > Not all give ways have a sign, some are just give way markings painted on the > road.
As far as the law is concerned, that is also a traffic sign, diagram 1003A in TSRGD 2016 (see http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2016/362/schedule/9/made ). Failure to give way is a criminal offence contrary to s. 36 RTA 1988. > > Phil (trigpoint) > -- Robert Skedgell (rskedgell) _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
