Re: [OSM-talk] Revisiting traffic control and traffic calming

2017-05-12 Thread Paul Johnson
On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 1:38 AM, Marc Gemis wrote: > ok, multiple from in a relation will solve this. > Isn't it a problem that some "from"s do not end in some "intersection"s ? Perhaps 3 intersection roles, with the single carriageway segment between the dual

Re: [OSM-talk] Revisiting traffic control and traffic calming

2017-05-12 Thread Marc Gemis
ok, multiple from in a relation will solve this. Isn't it a problem that some "from"s do not end in some "intersection"s ? On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 8:31 AM, Paul Johnson wrote: > > > On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 1:28 AM, Marc Gemis wrote: >> >> On Fri, May

Re: [OSM-talk] Revisiting traffic control and traffic calming

2017-05-12 Thread Paul Johnson
On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 1:28 AM, Marc Gemis wrote: > On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 8:20 AM, Paul Johnson wrote: > > > >> to: the collection of ways one can travel to after stopping/giving > >> way/waiting for traffic signal. This would include the from way

Re: [OSM-talk] Revisiting traffic control and traffic calming

2017-05-12 Thread Marc Gemis
On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 8:20 AM, Paul Johnson wrote: > >> to: the collection of ways one can travel to after stopping/giving >> way/waiting for traffic signal. This would include the from way so >> u-turns have to obey the sign/signal as well. > > > Yes. At a minimum, a

Re: [OSM-talk] Revisiting traffic control and traffic calming

2017-05-12 Thread Paul Johnson
On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 12:57 AM, Marc Gemis wrote: > So would a stop sign / give way sign /traffic signal then be mapped as > > stop_position: node where on the street does one have to stop/give > way/wait for traffic signal > My thinking on this is stop_position isn't

Re: [OSM-talk] Revisiting traffic control and traffic calming

2017-05-12 Thread Marc Gemis
So would a stop sign / give way sign /traffic signal then be mapped as stop_position: node where on the street does one have to stop/give way/wait for traffic signal sign : node (optional) the exact location of the sign from: the way one is following to which the action has to be applied (is this

Re: [OSM-talk] Revisiting traffic control and traffic calming

2017-05-11 Thread Paul Johnson
On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 10:28 AM, Jean-Marc Liotier wrote: > On Sun, 7 May 2017 01:57:54 -0500 > Paul Johnson wrote: > > > I think it's time that we seriously reconsider how stop signs, yield > > signs and traffic calming devices are handled in all but the

Re: [OSM-talk] Revisiting traffic control and traffic calming

2017-05-11 Thread Jean-Marc Liotier
On Sun, 7 May 2017 01:57:54 -0500 Paul Johnson wrote: > I think it's time that we seriously reconsider how stop signs, yield > signs and traffic calming devices are handled in all but the most > simple (all approaches to the affected node apply) cases. [..] I'm > thinking

Re: [OSM-talk] Revisiting traffic control and traffic calming

2017-05-07 Thread Jo
2017-05-07 9:30 GMT+02:00 Paul Johnson : > On Sun, May 7, 2017 at 2:25 AM, Jo wrote: > >> What about a type=traffic_sign relation? >> >> Where traffic_sign could be stop, give_way, parking >> > > I was thinking the typical highway=* tags for highway=stop,

Re: [OSM-talk] Revisiting traffic control and traffic calming

2017-05-07 Thread Paul Johnson
On Sun, May 7, 2017 at 2:25 AM, Jo wrote: > What about a type=traffic_sign relation? > > Where traffic_sign could be stop, give_way, parking > I was thinking the typical highway=* tags for highway=stop, highway=traffic_signals and highway=give_way. > In case of a stop

Re: [OSM-talk] Revisiting traffic control and traffic calming

2017-05-07 Thread Jo
What about a type=traffic_sign relation? Where traffic_sign could be stop, give_way, parking. We can put a traffic_sign tag on nodes, where they get the country_code:specific_national_code like BE:C1. Several traffic signs can have an effect on several ways and nodes of the road network, so we

Re: [OSM-talk] Revisiting traffic control and traffic calming

2017-05-07 Thread Paul Johnson
On Sun, May 7, 2017 at 2:12 AM, Nicolás Alvarez wrote: > > Do you know of a case where you would have a traffic calming device > only affecting one direction, but not already have a reason to map > each road direction as a separate way? > Somewhat commonly. Oklahoma

Re: [OSM-talk] Revisiting traffic control and traffic calming

2017-05-07 Thread Nicolás Alvarez
2017-05-07 3:57 GMT-03:00 Paul Johnson : > I think it's time that we seriously reconsider how stop signs, yield signs > and traffic calming devices are handled in all but the most simple (all > approaches to the affected node apply) cases. This largely after having a >

[OSM-talk] Revisiting traffic control and traffic calming

2017-05-07 Thread Paul Johnson
I think it's time that we seriously reconsider how stop signs, yield signs and traffic calming devices are handled in all but the most simple (all approaches to the affected node apply) cases. This largely after having a protracted discussion with one person about nodes lacking direction and this