Don't forget there is also a proposal for specifying more details on the destination key. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Destination_details It also allows to specify colour.
regards m On Sat, Jan 10, 2015 at 7:40 PM, Lukas Sommer <sommer...@gmail.com> wrote: > Looking at the description, I could imagine that the original idea was > to use key:destination on motorways and similar roads (primary WITH > primary_junction), because there you have normally no crossroads, but > only “y junctions” on oneways. So for motorways it is more likely that > there is only one version of the content of the signposts. But at > normal crossroads, it may be more likely that the signpost content for > one of the leaving ways is different (different content depending of > the road from which you are coming). > > However, that’s just raw guess about the original intention. Also > unsure if all these assumtions are correct (on the ground). > > > I suggest to remove the section "When to use" and instead add the > > following sentence (or similar): "Instead of they key destination, one > > might also use the relation destination_sign, which is able to provide > > detailed information about the type and colour(s) of the road sign." > > +1. Key:destination for the simple cases the the relation for the > complex cases seems fine for me. > > Lukas > > PS: In the wiki, Key:destination is used for “signposts or ground > writing”, but Relation:destination_sign only for signposts. I would > extend Relation:destination_sign also to ground writings. And in > general, I think it would be a good idea to harmonize the allowed tags > (key:distance, key:time) between key:destination and > relation:destination_sign. > > PPS: As far as I understand, the key:destination is used on OSM ways > _after_ a signpost/groundwriting. If this is correct, the examples > with the yellow and white signposts on the wiki page are confusing > (tagging a motorway_link makes no sense here), and I would recommand > to remove these three examples. > Lukas Sommer > > > 2015-01-10 17:40 GMT+01:00 Marc Gemis <marc.ge...@gmail.com>: > > I've asked this question several months ago on the help-website [1]. When > > should I use destination and when the relation? Until now I did not get > any > > answer. Only recently I noticed the sentence you are referring to. From > then > > on, I followed this advice. > > > > So I'm interested to learn which is the preferred way of mapping. I > didn't > > add too many destinations yet, and can easily remap what I did so far. > > > > > > regards > > > > m > > > > > > > > [1] > > > https://help.openstreetmap.org/questions/35719/mapping-destination-on-a-primary-road > > > > On Sat, Jan 10, 2015 at 5:27 PM, Martin Vonwald <imagic....@gmail.com> > > wrote: > >> > >> Hi! > >> > >> Currently it reads in the section "When to use" on the wiki page of the > >> key destination [1]: > >> "Attention: Do not use them for mapping at highway=primary and > >> highway=secondary (or smaller). In such cases, a destination sign > relation > >> is the recommended way for direction directives. " > >> > >> Also above that sentence a list of road types is given on which that key > >> should be used and only on that road types. > >> > >> May I ask who exactly recommended the use of the relation > destination_sign > >> and who decided, that destination may only be used on a few type of > roads? > >> > >> I suggest to remove the section "When to use" and instead add the > >> following sentence (or similar): "Instead of they key destination, one > might > >> also use the relation destination_sign, which is able to provide > detailed > >> information about the type and colour(s) of the road sign." > >> > >> That's the way I always thought about those two tagging schemes: > >> destination is the simple variant and destination_sign the complex. I > used > >> both in the past, but only used the key lately. > >> > >> Best regards, > >> Martin > >> > >> [1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:destination#When_to_use > >> > >> P.S: I am aware, that I may simply ignore the wiki, but I don't want to > >> lose any potential information, because someone thinks one must use > >> destination_sign on e.g. highway=primary, but considers it as too > >> complicated. > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Tagging mailing list > >> Tagging@openstreetmap.org > >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > >> > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Tagging mailing list > > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > > > > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
