On Mon, 13 Apr 2020 18:42:42 +0200 [email protected] wrote: > The second goal my proposal wants to message is to deprecate tagging > "crossing=traffic_signals" together with "highway=traffic_signals" on > the same node. Especially if you're saying this is a full crossing > mapped. It breaks the highway=crossing - tagging scheme we use for > all other types of crossing (except crossing=no). Some mappers > use "crossing=traffic_signals" together with > "highway=traffic_signals" on the same node als a shortcut for "lane > traffic signal" and "foot traffic signal" because it is rendered as > two traffic signals in JOSM. Or for mapping traffic signals for > crossing cyclists. But I think in every case it is better to use two > different (nearby) nodes for that. What do you think about it?
I think you should split it up into two proposals. "highway=traffic_signals;crossing=traffic_signals" is so widely used there's not a chance you'll get agreement to forbid it. If you tie your proposed "traffic_signals=crossing_on_demand" tagging to it, all that will happen is that "traffic_signals=crossing_on_demand" will be rejected as well. -- Mark _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
