On Tue, 14 Apr 2020 at 06:23, <lukas-...@web.de> wrote: > > To response on the mentioning: > "Currently the wiki page says "traffic_signals=crossing_on_demand makes > it easy to mark all traffic lights which do only control a crossing", > again I personally find highway=traffic_signals + > crossing=traffic_signals sufficient for that" > > Yes, that's true. I agree with that, but my point is, that not only those > traffic lights, which do control only a crossing, a mapped like this. Mappers > use it just as a shortcut for traffic light and crossing, no matter in which > relation between each other they are. That is not wrong, but it does not > really show for what the lane traffic lights are "resposible". Please have a > look at https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1339612951 and many many others in > this city. The traffic lights of course control the crossing, yes, but they > control the junction nearby, too. > So looking at highway=traffic_signals + crossing=traffic_signals on the same > node also makes it not possible to see only those crossings where n junction > or something else is, as I see it at the moment.
Hm, that's tagging I haven't seen before. My suggestion would be to not tag like that (the proposed new tag would suggest retagging of this anyway). My understanding of the detailed-intersection-tagging norms was that this should have highway=traffic_signals on the stop line for cars, and highway=crossing+crossing=traffic_signals on the middle of the pedestrian crossing - e.g. https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1822620449 or https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/393547028 --Jarek _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
