Yes, I’m aware of

focuses on the tagging style of intersecting roads and proposes to not
connect them anymore and so avoid turn restrictions. But
focuses on the junction area. I would prefer to keep both discussions
separate. (My first combined proposal for complex junctions and traffic
signals has shown that mixing up to much topics makes the discussion
harder.) However, I think both things are compatible.

Concerning the tag: junction=yes or highway=junction or something
completely different? The tag junction=yes is ugly, but currently yet in
use for simple junctions. If we decide to use highway=junction for the
area, we should use it also for the simple sections and move the existing
nodes with junction=yes to highway=junction. However, I’m open for both


Lukas Sommer

2014-10-21 16:00 GMT+00:00 fly <>:

> Am 18.10.2014 08:45, schrieb Lukas Sommer:
> > Hello.
> >
> > The combined proposal for complex junctions and complex traffic signal
> > systems had less support than I hoped (5 of 9 votes).
> >
> > Initially, I was thinking it was a good idea to treat these two features
> > together. However, this was obviously not a good idea. It made the
> > discussion harder. These two subjects seem to be to different to be
> > treated together. So it seems to be better to split this into two
> > different proposals: one for complex junctions and one for complex
> > traffic signals.
> >
> > Today I start RFC for the complex junction tagging. A new proposal page
> > has been created at
> >
> > which takes into account the comments which have been made during the
> > previous voting.
> Please have a look at the proposal for highway=junction [1]. It
> describes the same but with a different tag and the two proposal should
> be merged.
> Cheers fly
> [1]
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
Tagging mailing list

Reply via email to