Maybe there would be some reason th change the proposal on tagging traffic_signals=crossing_only to make it more clear in teh value that only those traffic lights are meant with it, which do control only a crossing. But if that would be a solution at all, I don't really know. Because I think there is no real clear conclusion at the moment when highway=traffic_signals + crossing=traffic_signals to use on the same node and when not, because there are so many different possible situations as some examples were illustrated.
 
--Lukas
 
 
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 15. April 2020 um 15:27 Uhr
Von: "John Willis via Tagging" <tagging@openstreetmap.org>
An: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools" <tagging@openstreetmap.org>
Cc: "John Willis" <jo...@mac.com>
Betreff: Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - traffic_signals=crossing_on_demand
 
 
On Apr 15, 2020, at 8:34 PM, Paul Allen <pla16...@gmail.com> wrote:
 
The traffic lights control the junction
 
We have a lot of traffic light controlled crossings in Japan that are just for a crosswalk, while the smaller intersecting road is stop-sign controlled for cars. Only the crosswalk is controlled by a signal that stops traffic on the larger road - only when pressed. There are many of these. 
 
 
- crosswalks for traffic signal controlled intersections where the light is _only_ sensor triggered - magnet loop in the road and a push-button for pedestrians. there are very few of these. a little sign says “push button” - and if you don’t press it, you will wait until a car comes.
 
both of these are “on demand” to me . 
 
this is beyond normal signal controlled crosswalks in the middle of larger roads (like in front of a hospital, etc), 
 
 
Javbw
 
 
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Reply via email to