Motorcar, car, automobile, passenger_car or else?

How to express this type of vehicle symbol?

That is used on traffic_signs and undersigns.
At traffic_signs, it express, that the rule is for this symbol, probibitted for others or else.
With undersigns it is prohibited, permitted, excluded from the rule that is expressed by the trafficsign.

Country traffic rules, determine which forms of transport are covered by the symbol.
It depends on the legal vehicle category.

For example: M1, car, minibus, camper van.

Motor vehicle on 4 or more wheels, designed and constructed for the transport of persons, with up to 9 seats including driver’s seat

A traffic_sign example: the use on a parking sign.

Looking for a solution.
The main point is choosing a OSM key with a OSM description (with most consensus as possible) that fits the rule.

motorcar is widely used but the key includes all kinds of vehicles. On that page the controversy is documented. Used taginfo 605 833 times, the key does no suit the symbol on the sign in the countries, where it is used. Look at the german page how widely this category is.

Conclusion: It does not match the symbol.

car is deprecated, on taginfo now used 2211 times,

The question is, could it be reinstalled?
For purpose of the symbol, that we agree it is only for this symbol.

Perhaps to avoid confusion, not.

If not.

The synonym is “automobile”, this is not used much, 11 times taginfo
The symbol (above) could well be expressed with automobile.

Wikipedia page car, with automobile writes about it.

A other possibility is for a key, “passenger_car” as mentioned in the wikipedia article .
Wikipedia page passenger car


Taginfo: use 5 times, almost a clean key.
The sign symbol looks like it, so name the key “passenger_car” then we talk about what fit in the OSM description (consensus)

I think I would choose “passenger_car”. To avoid motorcar and car.

What to choose?

A sign (symbol) must be tagged as directly as possible.
With less keys.
A big point for me is to avoid opposite tagging to neutralize for other keys, transportation modes. At this topic questionable use of motorcar, then you must set hvg=no bus=no tourist_bus=no agricultural=no etc.
It must fit in within the access hierarchy.

Give me your thoughts.

At the end I have to choose, which key can be used in a preset for expression of this symbol on signs, or even use more keys to express it, what I do not want.

motorcar is widely used but the key includes all kinds of vehicles

it doesn’t, or more precisely, it includes other motor vehicles with 2 tracks when used as an access restriction but doesn’t when used as a permit/positive. Not really transparent, but this is how the tag is used afaik (and also how traffic signs work around here).
Curious example:

traffic sign is vehicle=no except cars (vehicle class). Funny enough with these signs you might legally walk there.

There’s a difference between

image (includes cars and other motor vehicles with 2 tracks)


image (includes only cars)


In Germany this symbol represents a PKW = Personenkraftwagen = passenger motor car which is closest to your option “passenger car”.

“Passenger motor car” is more precise and cannot be mixed up with “passenger railway car” for instance but in the given context I’d say no need to differentiate, so “passenger car” would be my choice.

So in the moment, motorcar is used for both classes, depending on context.

Also there exists the proposal double_tracked_motor_vehicle.

The problem is, can everyone understand, who sees this keytag in what context it is placed. Also if you are not so well informed. A tag must be straight forward.

taginfo double_tracked_motor_vehicle, is decreasing because some deleted them.
I find this against the osm rules, if a tag is true, a direct translation of the traffic_sign. It should not be deleted. It gives more information about the translation of the traffic_sign. Give me your thought about this point of deleting.
There reaction, it is not a concensus tag. It is not on the wiki.
I tagged a lot of them, discussed it on the talk mailing, someone else wrote it in the access wiki.
double_tracked_motor_vehicle it is a long name to tag, that makes it difficult to use. More a key for preset tagging. On mailing talk more people see motorcar use as a problem. Also that neutralize tagging must be avoided. For me that are methodological principles, but sometimes it is not possible because of the resulting situation, but still try to make it right in the future, use
Tagging: motor_vehicle=no + motorcycle=yes (+ moped=yes/mofa=yes) Often they forget to set the motorcycle/mofa/moped keys., This is detrimental to these forms of transport.
That’s why I wrote

But unfortunatly, only use double_tracked_motor_vehicle, has too much impact on the routing system, which is why existing tagging is still needed until routing developers include it. Hence I use it side by side, this is right away a check that mofa and moped are set properly. In combination with the tag traffic_sign.

Maybe then comes a point to safely deprecate motorcar. :wink:

Working on a preset, then you realise the problems and the difficulty to set the forms of transport, tag the :forward and :conditional in the key for more forms of transport. These are long keys to type, with possible errors.
Trying to get a OC, one Click, solution and menu for each traffic_sign, in a way that the preset is without error.
Then you realize that, opposite tagging to neutralize for other keys, is a problem. Mainly if you don’t understand the material well.

To set the traffic_sign= signcode +undersigncode, so later we can control tagged form of transport.
People still sometimes forget to put this traffic prohibition code, which is quite a search.
As I am one of them, the need for a preset.

On topic:

That’s why I searched for a good key for the topicpost image.

Hope others can give an opinion on this too, thanks, a good addition to the subject.

A nice example of a text written on the sign. As the topicpost symbol. The same applies to both.

But why all the other forms of transport with no. hgv=no etc.
Is this because the need to, opposite tagging to neutralize for other keys, motorcar overrules vehicle, so it is needed. Although i find that this should be avoided. The motorcar use problem.

It all makes it difficult, passenger_motor_car or passenge_car, would be the solution, IF routing programs adapt it, this is only when it is used much, till then, double tagging is unfortunatly needed and even the worse opposite tagging.
Still it gives more information, expressed by the sign and later on for control of tagging, Also key traffic_sign=(code) would also help. Routing engine could work with it.

So I would like to use it in a preset, that it is used more.

At the end better OSM data. That’s the goal.

A new tag is needed for (only) passenger cars, but the existing access hierarchy (motorcar) should not be changed.