Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - junction=intersection

2020-07-13 Thread Matthew Woehlke
On 10/07/2020 16.38, Jarek Piórkowski wrote: On Fri, 10 Jul 2020 at 15:53, Matthew Woehlke wrote: [problem description elided; see archives] Yeah that's a problem. But since OSM would have to be changed to add junction=intersection tags anyway, isn't it better to use the established method of

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - junction=intersection

2020-07-10 Thread Tod Fitch
> On Jul 10, 2020, at 9:26 AM, Matthew Woehlke wrote: > > On 10/07/2020 11.24, Peter Elderson wrote: >> Well, if you do a couple of intersections it's no big deal, but if every >> intersection would need this and it breaks relations, no matter whose fault >> it is, it is a problem. Then it's

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - junction=intersection

2020-07-10 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 10. Jul 2020, at 21:52, Matthew Woehlke wrote: > > I have to strongly disagree. Consider an intersection of dual carriageways > (so, four intersection nodes) where signals are tagged on the intersection > nodes. that’s the problem, they should not be tagged on the

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - junction=intersection

2020-07-10 Thread Jarek Piórkowski
On Fri, 10 Jul 2020 at 15:53, Matthew Woehlke wrote: > On 10/07/2020 15.01, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > >> On 10. Jul 2020, at 16:17, Matthew Woehlke > >> wrote: > >> My use case isn't the only one that has issues with this sort of > >> thing; routers can "see" more traffic lights than

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - junction=intersection

2020-07-10 Thread Matthew Woehlke
On 10/07/2020 15.01, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: On 10. Jul 2020, at 16:17, Matthew Woehlke wrote: My use case isn't the only one that has issues with this sort of thing; routers can "see" more traffic lights than actually exist and can (so I hear, anyway) give directions that are potentially

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - junction=intersection

2020-07-10 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 10. Jul 2020, at 16:17, Matthew Woehlke wrote: > > My use case isn't the only one that has issues with this sort of thing; > routers can "see" more traffic lights than actually exist and can (so I hear, > anyway) give directions that are potentially confusing. this

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - junction=intersection

2020-07-10 Thread Matthew Woehlke
For illustrative purposes, I went ahead and tagged https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/175473372. (I chose this intersection because the way was already split, so the only edit needed was to add the tag.) On 10/07/2020 10.15, Matthew Woehlke wrote: As some of you may recall, I'm working on a

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - junction=intersection

2020-07-10 Thread Matthew Woehlke
On 10/07/2020 12.57, Tod Fitch wrote: In the old days the wiki said you could put a highway=stop or highway=give_way node on a way and the data consumer would determine the nearest intersection and just do the right thing. I mapped several thousand, yes thousand, stop signs that way. Later it

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - junction=intersection

2020-07-10 Thread Matthew Woehlke
On 10/07/2020 12.22, Clifford Snow wrote: Interesting suggestion. The sumo github page doesn't appear to have any open issues that involve OSM and intersections that I could find. (I only looked at intersection issue titles) Has this been reported to the sumo developers? Sumo documentation does

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - junction=intersection

2020-07-10 Thread Matthew Woehlke
On 10/07/2020 11.24, Peter Elderson wrote: Well, if you do a couple of intersections it's no big deal, but if every intersection would need this and it breaks relations, no matter whose fault it is, it is a problem. Then it's not just modeling, but forced repair work. Sure, but my point was

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - junction=intersection

2020-07-10 Thread Clifford Snow
Matthew, Interesting suggestion. The sumo github page doesn't appear to have any open issues that involve OSM and intersections that I could find. (I only looked at intersection issue titles) Has this been reported to the sumo developers? Sumo documentation does suggest fixing OSM issues but other

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - junction=intersection

2020-07-10 Thread Peter Elderson
Well, if you do a couple of intersections it's no big deal, but if every intersection would need this and it breaks relations, no matter whose fault it is, it is a problem. Then it's not just modeling, but forced repair work. May be worth it, but I would like to know that at proposal time, not by

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - junction=intersection

2020-07-10 Thread Matthew Woehlke
On 10/07/2020 10.36, Peter Elderson wrote: Question: does it break anything? I am thinking about existing relations of various kinds. If splitting ways breaks relations, well, a) that's an editor problem, and b) I've already been breaking those left and right from splitting ways to improve

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - junction=intersection

2020-07-10 Thread Peter Elderson
Question: does it break anything? I am thinking about existing relations of various kinds. Best, Peter Elderson Op vr 10 jul. 2020 om 16:17 schreef Matthew Woehlke < mwoehlke.fl...@gmail.com>: > As some of you may recall, I'm working on a project to do traffic > simulation with the help of OSM

[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - junction=intersection

2020-07-10 Thread Matthew Woehlke
As some of you may recall, I'm working on a project to do traffic simulation with the help of OSM data and SUMO¹. One of the issues that SUMO has is that the typical method of modeling intersections (which I don't propose to change, mostly) results in SUMO thinking there are multiple