On 15/05/12 22:25, Colin Smale wrote:
> It would be nice if these "rond-points" would be explicitly tagged (e.g.
> junction=rond_point???) so mkgmap can still easily be taught to
> recognise it and treat it as a roundabout even if it doesn't comply with
> the OSM semantics for one. Otherwise your satnav will tell you to turn
> right at the junction, even if you want to turn left {driving on the
> right}. I am concerned here about usability of the data, particularly
> for routing.
According to Wikipedia at least, the ones without priority for
circulating traffic are called "traffic circles" in the US, and they use
the BE "roundabout" as we do in GB:
"In the U.S., traffic engineers use the term roundabout for
intersections in which entering traffic must yield to traffic already in
the circle, reserving the term traffic circle for those in which
entering traffic is controlled by stop signs, traffic signals, or is not
formally controlled."
-- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traffic_circle
not a bad distinction to retain, as I've mentioned. Luckily the language
divide operates in our favo(u)r here.
So as I understand it the j=traffic_circle would seem to be a more
generic English name which could include rond-points, though carrefours
giratoire are the same concept as j=roundabout. If the distinction ever
needs to be made, I'd suggest using {junction,highway}=traffic_circle
for cases with other priorities.
http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=traffic_circle#values
-- very little usage of either right now
Note that we don't ordinarily represent priorities at junctions anyway.
Given that we don't make the distinction elsewhere, wouldn't it make
sense to solve the problem separately?
--
Andrew Chadwick
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
