Sorry for posting this question in English. I’m looking how our colleagues in Netherlands are tagging this possibility for cyclists to ignore a red traffic light. I found the rule name “rechtsaf voor fietsers vrij” on this german Wikipedia page :
I doubt if routing engine ever use it.
OSRM is planning to add penalties on traffic signals (default time is already set at 7 sec.)
I’m asking because the question is coming at regular intervals in the French community because such road signs are blooming since 2012. I just wanted to know if this kind of “turn permission” (but it can also be straight ahead, so it’s more an ‘ignore traffic signals’). So if this kind of “turn permission” is an already well established tagging practice in the Netherlands. It seems not.
Did you think about checking the USA to see how traffic lights are handled? In most places you can turn right through red, under certain conditions. But there sometimes is a sign saying “No right on red”, so the tagging of the junction or traffic lights might be able to handle the distinction. In NYC the default is no, so there are signs to explicitly allow right turn on red. If they have found a way to cover all this, just add :bicycle to the data and you are done.
It looks like OSRM is not doing the right thing with no_right_turn_on_red. Maybe it is only looking at the start of the string? I agree that we shouldn’t mix up different things - it looks to me like the tagging is not unreasonable, but OSRM clearly doesn’t yet know how to handle it.
*If the first word is “no_”, then no routing is possible from the “from” to the “to” member, and if it is “only_”, then you know that the only routing originating from the “from” member leads to the “to” member. *
