2011/9/6 sergio sevillano <[email protected]>: > the present tagging schema means "this crossing is regulated by traffic > lights" > (highway=traffic_lights in the intersection node) > the relation proposal connects all traffic lights of an intersection meaning > the same thing > "this crossing is regulated by traffic lights" and they are placed here. > what i was talking about is placing the tags at > the nodes of ways that are affected by a traffic lights > in more detail > (no need for relations here) > the approach is important > if we map the physical traffic light signs > then it will be chaos as this is solved differently by country. > in this case the nodes should be alone (not in the way) > at the side maybe... > but i would not recommend to do this approach at all.
I want to point out that the frequently used tag is _not_ highway=traffic_lights but it is highway=traffic_signals. As the tag is in plural this already suggests the more generalized way of tagging a whole intersection instead of a single light. Opposed to this the tag definition seems to contradict this interpretation: "A traffic signal for regulating circulation." (otherwise this could have been: "an intersection controlled by traffic lights"). Personally I am not against tagging single devices if one wants to do this, but would prefer to do it with a different tag. Mappping single devices might be interesting if on the same intersection the devices have different features (think about traffic_signals:sound=* and other subtags). http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dtraffic_signals cheers, Martin _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
