The above sign is MUTCD R1-5L, and can be seen here on the wiki, with the guidance of tagging it as highway=give_way. This makes sense in some ways and not in others, and I’m looking for some discussion on whether this sign needs another tag. I think it does and would like your perspectives.
Here’s an example location in Sacramento, CA that uses that tagging on a node for this sign nearby that made me notice this sign. There’s no other yield sign nearby. I think this could be confusing for data consumers that can’t separate it out from a standard yield, and it’s somewhat redundant with the explicitly mapped marked crosswalk where a driver is already legally required to yield to a pedestrian.
So, my questions are:
- Is there value in explicitly mapping this sign. I think there is, even if just marking the actual MUTCD code (which I did on a nearby sign)
- Is
highway=give_waythe appropriate tag? I don’t think it is and think a new tag or explicitly required combination of tags, such asgive_way=pedestrianfor this sign would be appropriate to prevent confounding with otherhighway=give_waysigns that apply regardless of pedestrian presence and always have a speed limit of 15MPH (in California, at least, but whatever the local jurisdiction’s speed limit is). - Is there a value to data consumers I’m missing in keeping this sign tagged as is?
I tried tagging it as highway=give_way; give_way=pedestrians to separate things out, but I see that more as interim while discussion occurs.
Thanks for any input you have!
6 posts - 3 participants
Ce sujet de discussion accompagne la publication sur https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/tagging-yield-here-for-pedestrians-signs-mutcd-r1-5/103368