Proposed features/Traffic enforcement

From OpenStreetMap Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Traffic enforcement
Status: Abandoned (inactive)
Proposed by: Lulu-Ann
Tagging: enforcement, enforcement_direction, enforcement_installation=(several)
RFC start: 2008-09-24
Vote start: 2008-10-25


Superseeded

  • Relation:enforcement is approved since 2008-01-08. Please use relations for traffic enforcement now.

What ?

Several kinds of devices are installed to measure and document traffic violations, such as

  • speed traps
  • red light cameras
  • distance between vehicles measuring
  • weight check (heavy goods vehicles)
  • ordinary traffic checks (papers, use of alcohol etc.)

These devices belong to the same class of objects and shall therefore use the same tagging schema with different values. Sometimes a combination of values is required if the device serves more than one function (e.g. both a speed trap and red light camera in one device).

Why ?

  • Because we want to reflect reality.
  • Because the traffic enforcement is of interest.
  • Because these devices are placed on dangerous streets and knowing about them helps you drive more slowly and more safely.

Tagging

Traffic enforcement devices are not a place you'd want to go and are therefore not an amenity. These have a separate tag, enforcement, which specifies that type of enforcement is present. Further tags can be used to give details.

enforcement = speed | distance | redlight | weight | check 
(check: Allgemeine Verkehrskontrolle, ordinary traffic check - or VOSN vehicle inspections including HGV weight checks in the UK)
enforcement_direction = along|opposite|both 
(using the way's direction if used on a way)
enforcement_direction = N, NE, E, SE, S, SW, NW 
(if used on a node or enforcement applies of a type which renders the way's direction meaningless)
Where the direction stands for the direction where you are travelling to, 
not for the direction in which the camera points.
enforcement_installation = static | mobile | favorite 
(mobile: Police follows your car with onboard measuring devices. 
favorite: favorite location to place a non permanent device such as speed camera van)

Note for routing software: The angle of the enforcement direction should be interpreted as 90 degrees. The NE, SE, SW, SE values are added to make the decision easier for diagonal ways, not to add a higher precision of angle.

Rendering

These objects shall not be rendered in each country by default due to legal implications. I think we shall have further votes for rendering in each country if possible.

Icons are welcome!

I would propose the standard traffic sign for maxspeed, maxweight, traffic lights ahead etc. but with a neon orange border instead of a red one and a blue icon or writing in the middle instead of a black one. Or maybe the standard sign but inverted?

Discussion

Please use the discussion page.

Legality

  • Don't map what you are not allowed to map to in your state.
  • Don't use maps with objects rendered that you are not allowed to use. (Use other rendering rules)
  • Don't use a routing software that shows / alarms you of objects you are not allowed to use. (Have your routing software hide the objects and turn off the alarm or better use a map without these objects.)

But please don't try to avoid people from the rest of the world to map things of interest.

Thanks

Thanks to Rw who started Proposed_features/Speed_trap, from which I took several ideas and lines of text. Thanks to Lulu-ann for the first version of this proposal (updated by trs998)

Voting

(previous votes cleared as the proposal has been updated after comments during previous voting) (Voting due to start on 25-10-08)

Wiki tip: Type {{vote|yes/no}} to approve/oppose this proposal, type 4 tildes like: ~~~~ to sign your user name & date.


  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. Dmgroom 14:14, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. Gary68 15:46, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. Pov 19:32, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
  • I oppose this proposal I oppose this proposal, This proposal is missing the very basics: How to map this? Node on the street or node close to the street? Or street-way itself? And why is it usable on areas? Far too vague to be approved.. --Tordanik 22:53, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
  • I oppose this proposal I oppose this proposal. Don't introduce a tag like enforcement_direction=N/E/S/W. The enforcement nodes should be part of the ways itself (as to have no ambiguity on which way the enforcement applies), and thus forward/backward/both should be enough for that, except for nodes at junctions, but in those cases N/E/S/W won't be a solution either (there could very well be two or more ways in the north sector). So we may need something new for junctions, but don't solve it with something that's flawed in itself. Better leave it out of this proposal and try to look for solutions elsewhere so it could apply to other nodes that could use the same as well. --Eimai 12:15, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. Speed cameras (and vans etc) can be on one way, or in a field, and apply to multiple ways (both ways of a dual-carriageway, for example) If a enforcement device only monitors one way, then I see no reason it can't be placed on the offending way using the enforcement_direction=along/opposite/both tags provided. It does say that N/E/S/W etc are only if the way's direction is meaningless or it's on a lone node. Trs998 14:09, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
  • I oppose this proposal I oppose this proposal. Adding a third way of giving ways a direction after the direction on the way and the method used by turn_restrictions is bogus. --Flohoff 15:28, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
  • I oppose this proposal I oppose this proposal. TomH 16:46, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
  • I oppose this proposal I oppose this proposal. same as Eimai and Flohoff -- Pieren 19:06, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
  • I oppose this proposal I oppose this proposal, For the very same reasons Tordanik and Eimai were bringing up..--Grille Chompa 09:34, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
  • I oppose this proposal I oppose this proposal, This tag can be set on almost all the roads I usually drives, giving a tag for something as police controls is just meaningless, they can appear anywhere, and positions move regularly for the "place they usually are".. --Skippern 10:08, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
  • I oppose this proposal I oppose this proposal, without prejudice. Without regard to the why, this proposal is missing the how and what.. Chriscf 11:52, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
  • I oppose this proposal I oppose this proposal, Maybe static speed cameras, but trying to tag mobile stops is silly.. -- Nik_Doof 12:00, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
  • I oppose this proposal I oppose this proposal, for the very same reasons Tordanik and Eimai were bringing up.--De muur 12:55, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
  • I oppose this proposal I oppose this proposal, because the risk people will map this in countries this isn't legal.. --Willem1 16:10, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
With respect, this isn't our problem, and neither should we make it our problem. Chriscf 09:22, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
  • I oppose this proposal I oppose this proposal, because traffic enforcement is based on many complex things, like time, day and holidays.. --computerfritze 16:17, 21 December 2008 (MEZ)