Talk:Tag:highway=traffic mirror

Rendering

We see "", but where is that rendered? Not carto certainly. Jidanni (talk) 06:41, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

Why don't you read File:Traffic_mirror.svg#Summary? They would be too small a detail to render. Usually it's titled "proposed rendering" for maps, but a standard editing software as JOSM could count. ---- Kovposch (talk) 04:59, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

Public, private, official, etc.

Add tags to distinguish official government installed mirrors, vs. local people's installed mirrors. "Ralph hung a mirror there, rather than waiting for the government to act. Even if no fatalities yet." Jidanni (talk) 22:34, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

Yes there's always ownership=*? ---- Kovposch (talk) 04:59, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

I'd prefer operator=* because after all its a simple street surveillance device for public use, isn't it? --Hasienda (talk) 09:42, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

Looking at?

I can not actually understand, in the description of the relation, the "to" role.

It would much more useful to have in the relation the direction in which the mirror allow you to see when stopped at the "from" position. (and this can be with a way or a node). A good name for the role is needed? Looking, toward, seeing? --AnyFile (talk) 13:33, 7 June 2022 (UTC)

Reading it again, I now think that this is the role of the "to" role, but it is quite difficult to understand it. --AnyFile (talk) 19:24, 7 June 2022 (UTC)

Had the same difficulties to wrap my head around current explanation for role=to in English as well as German translation. Obviously it must be improved, because taginfo reveals zero relations yet, despite I judge these potentially more useful than tagged mirror locations alone, that are counted in thousands by now.

Not being a native English speaker I still attempt to suggest role=section for the way given insight to by that particular mirror.

Plus the wiki page is inconsistent by mentioning relation-based tagging approach while the symbology on right hand side only depicts node-based tagging. --Hasienda (talk) 09:33, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

See 17552472 17552472 for an example as I see best fit/use the power of relation-based tagging:

1. role=device - mirror position
2. role=from - give-way or stop position
3. role=section - look-ahead part of the otherwise barely or invisible way
4. role=to - one or more relevant destination ways that require looking ahead at traffic to be reached safely

--Hasienda (talk) 09:56, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

First experience

Today, I've used this tag for the first time, see https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12536423929 . Here's what I found in reality: Two mirrors (for looking left and right) opposite the exit of a supermarket. Here's what I tagged: Node tagged with "highway=traffic_mirror" where a pole with the mirrors is located on the sidewalk, opposite the exit lane of the supermarket. Relation "type=traffic_mirror" with the members: 1. The mirror node as "mirror", the exit lane of the supermarket as "from", the part of the street left from the intersection with the exit lane as "to", and also the part of the street right from the intersection with the exit lane as "to". I did not understand how "from" and "to" could be nodes, in my case they are ways. I also did not understand the instruction "This should be a bi-directional node." How can the mirror node have a direction if it is not part of a way? Defining "section" members for the relation (as proposed above) did not appear to make sense to me, as the visibility of sections of the street depends on the many factors like the height of my eyes above the road surface and how far I have advanced in the exit lane. Should I change anything? --Biff (talk) 15:19, 27 January 2025 (UTC)

I looked around a bit and found that quite a number of mirrors are tagged as a node with "highway=traffic_mirror" and "direction=x", with x being the direction in degrees in which the mirror faces. This is only partially helpful because many traffic mirrors have a convex shape and the simple physics of a planar mirror do not apply. Also, it might provide the wrong impression that the mirror is intended to be used when driving in the opposite direction, e.g. entering a site, which frequently doesn't work. The relation is a better solution. --Biff (talk) 15:36, 27 January 2025 (UTC)

The direction tag is, unfortunately a standard tag, that has been defined in a way that is difficult to understand. The same problem apply for many other objects with the direction tag. it would it better if the definition of direction would be better and not in contrast with itself in some points). However the page about traffic mirror dos not say to use the direction tag. (even if it can be a good idea to use). How the mirror should be used (or how it was designed to be used) should be expressed with the relation that you mention. I do not know why it was chosen to use nodes and not way for the from and to field. In the relation Relation:restriction ways are used. It could be a good idea to allow to use also ways (and the use of way should be the preferred one, as they are easier to maintain). The difficulty in using ways for the from and to roles is that you should split the way near the mirror. As a node is now request, just use the first node you find in the way where you came from (or going to). I do not know why it is written about the mirror node that "This should be a bi-directional node." . This has been written since the very first version of this page, but I do not even know what it does mean, as there is no definition of bi-directional node. --AnyFile (talk) 09:29, 28 January 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for your answer! I suppose that we could write up a proposal for an improved tagging scheme for traffic mirror relations that uses ways. The proposal would highlight typical problems with the existing node-based approach, explain the new concept and include some typical examples. Should we start this proposal? --Biff (talk) 12:07, 28 January 2025 (UTC)

If you want, then we can do that. However the proposal should also include the possibility of using nodes or this would break all the relations already done. --AnyFile (talk) 13:16, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

Yes, the proposal should definitely explain that the older tagging scheme used nodes. --Biff (talk) 19:49, 12 February 2025 (UTC)

See Proposal:Traffic mirror relation using ways --Biff (talk) 22:36, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

type=traffic_mirror was already mentioned a decade ago. You should clarify you didn't invent it on your own for the acceptance. I personally feel a proposal is not absolutely necessary, when it's already documented and somewhat "de facto". https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Tag:highway=traffic_mirror&type=revision&diff=905008&oldid=871094
—— Kovposch (talk) 07:30, 6 March 2025 (UTC)