Talk:Tag:highway=give way

At the moment tagstat show more uses of highway=yield (84 vs 13) there's also highway=yield, at 89 vs. 189 uses of give_way, but which has been used longer; first give_way's are from February 2010 vs. July 2008 for yield. But the conversion would be simple, anyway, if any software makes uses of the data. Alv 07:44, 11 June 2010 (UTC) Alv 08:00, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

XAPI shows 184 give ways to 98 yield... --Delta foxtrot2 07:57, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

With so few tags used I doubt it really matter which has been used the longest, what about which was documented first? Alternatively OSM usually defaults to UK english. I highly doubt any software uses either at present, and I also doubt either appears in any presets... --Delta foxtrot2 08:47, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

The point was that what ever is tagged or documented, both are in use and neither is so overwhelmingly popular that it would matter, at least until someone makes use of the information. Alv 09:51, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

I'm planning to tag all the give_way signs in the surrounding suburbs, which is why I wrote a wiki page for this in the first place. --Delta foxtrot2 10:31, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Right of Passage

In Norway there are something called forkjørsveg, which can be translated with priority road or road with right of passage, where all crossing or entering traffic have to give way. I have not seen this kind of roads anywhere else (these priority roads have signs indicating its right of passage) --Skippern 08:33, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

At least all Scandinavian countries use them - each and every sideroad has a yield (or stop) sign. It might have other implications, such as "no parking on the driving lanes (outside urban areas)". Alv 09:51, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

For some time now, there's Key:priority_road for recording that. Alv 21:04, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Which seems less objective since you're tagging what someone thinks rather than what's on the ground. Also how do you tag when 2 priority roads intersect? JohnSmith 21:14, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

I tried to improve the tag's mapping guide to emphasize the interim nature of the skipped stubs approach. Two priority roads can not intersect without either road having a =end section before the intersection (and a give_way sign). If a road operator were to forget the end signs by mistake, it wouldn't take long before the first crash. Alv 07:30, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Interest ? Usage ?

I don't see the value of tagging this excepted for traffic signs collectors perhaps... --Pieren 16:22, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

This sort of information is useful for more accurately calculating fastest routing... --JohnSmith 16:33, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Can you provide the name of an application using it ? --Pieren 08:56, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Since when does an application need to support a tag before we can start using it? --JohnSmith 12:46, 9 July 2010 (UTC) {+1, well said Ceyockey)

How to Use?

No sure exactly how to use this - given two ways joining, then the 'give way' only applies to one of the ways, so if I put it on the node of the ways connection how to specify which of the 2 ways it applies to? Or should I create another node just prior to the junction on the applicable way? --Pshipley 01:04, 12 August 2010 (BST)

At this stage most people seem to have just tagged a node with the location, most give way signs usually appear before an intersection, I guess you could use some kind of relation to indicate the 'from' node where the sign is and another 'to' node to indicate the junction/direction effected path. -- JohnSmith 10:11, 12 August 2010 (BST)

That sounds like a modification of how turn restrictions work. --Ceyockey 03:22, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

bad description

Actually we do have a proposal process and if the creator used it, there probably wouldn't be such a bad description. There are no indications on how to use this (on a node part of the highway or beside it). Why is this a highway-tag? There are already established ways to tag traffic_signs. -- Dieterdreist 14:55, 15 September 2010 (BST)

direction

The direction should be tagged using forward or backward now. There is editing software for OSM that does not care about the direction and will not even warn you when you change the ways direction. Saving the direction with a degree int value is also not really good since the node can be moved around.
My suggestion is to transform the direction to a system like it is used in Relation:enforcement for speed cameras. The node that is now tagged with give_way will still have the same tag, but as a relation which will get from and to node information. As type I would go for traffic_sign.
Any comments on that? --TBKMrt (talk) 01:06, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

Use cases of highway=give_way and traffic_sign=give_way

The tags highway=give_way and traffic_sign=give_way should describe different things. As the tag highway=give_way will implement a traffic rule while passing a node in a given direction, the tag traffic_sign=give_way describes a traffic sign which sets this traffic rule into force.

It is allowed to have both tags included in a single node which is part of a way. It is also allowed to miss traffic_sign=give_way for the node which is part of a way, because the traffic sign might be mapped separately beside the street where it is actually located. Additionally, according to German law § 10 StVO while leaving a living street by crossing a lowered curb, the give_way rule is set into force even without any related traffic sign.

So, there are regular cases where tag highway=give_way is required but tag traffic_sign=give_way is not applicable. My summery is that the
Wiki page for Tag:highway=give way requires a major revision
for following targets:

1. Tag highway=give_way just implements a traffic rule "give way".
2. The description, that tag highway=give_way describes a traffic sign, needs to be removed.
3. Adding links to Wiki pages traffic_sign=give_way for general purpose and country specific traffic_sign=DE:205 (German variant as an example).

--Vanagaudi (talk) 04:06, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

I think making changes a page in the wiki describing one of the oldest tags and one of the massive tags without a proposal behind is not a good choice (this also should go for highway=stop). These pages were describing a traffic_sign because at first they were describing a specific traffic sign, you can see in the caption of the image and as I have discussed before in the forum. Later some people started to change the wiki freely without consensus giving other meaning to these tags but without a proposal.

An active tag "de facto" should not be changed it from the wiki without a proposal to make public these changes would be effective (and its revision on the map in some kind of way to assure the real meaning of it). How many nodes from the 1,435,878 with this key=value you can find in taginfo can you assure us not to be traffic signs themselves? --Yopaseopor (talk) 15:45, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

And we have already discussed before highway=give_way , highway=stop , means the yield or stopping point, not literally the signs. The traffic_sign=* can be on a different point, and exactly where the sign is physically.
—— Kovposch (talk) 17:05, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

The lede is already "points at which a traffic sign or marking instructs traffic travelling in one direction to cede priority", and Tag:highway=give_way#See_Also mentioned traffic_sign=give_way "Used to mark the physical position of the give way sign post itself". The box simply needs to be updated. The signs or marks summary/labeling is for describing it easily, not literally and exactly.
—— Kovposch (talk) 17:10, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

Well , I'm sure you can link here the multiple discussions and accepted proposals about this topic and its resolution where we can read no more it is a traffic sign, and also the analysis of the nodes done before these changes in the wiki were taking effect and the actions to review it and adapt it to the new scheme approved. Because I don't think making able the possibility of tagging the traffic sign only with a new tag without any proposal behind would be automatically the deprecation of the old meaning and the old method. Or yes?

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dgive_way

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Tag:highway%3Dstop&oldid=2596813 --Yopaseopor (talk) 18:26, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

Does it make any difference if highway=give_way turns it's meaning from traffic sign to traffic rule only? Data consumers like navigation system still warns about give_way junctions, they also may display a warning symbol. Travel time calculators are still able to take waiting time into account. Map renderers do not take care about traffic sings at all, as far as I know. But there is a problem on virtual environment systems which may display traffic signs mapped as separate nodes away from a way segment at places where they are actually located. This would cause to display the give_way sign twice.

I think in general there is an urgent need in OSM data base to clearly differentiate between traffic rules and traffic signs which never should share the same tag-value combination. If required, current node carrying the highway=give_way information may get an additional tag like traffic_sign=give_way or traffic_sign=DE:325.2 to give the reason for the give_way rule enforcement. In Wiki page modification 1 February 2018 this problem had been targeted first time. Also it may happen that there is no traffic sign at all but the give_way rule had been set into force because of other reasons such as entering streets from minor tracks.

My proposal for highway=give_way is to keep the meaning as traffic rule but take away the meaning as traffic sign.

--Vanagaudi (talk) 13:53, 7 November 2025 (UTC)

For me is a big difference, and for "one feature , one osm element" too. Like this, traffic signs also does not have a proposal (I have tried two times but I have failed to approve it.)

I understand the urgence but I don't think the best way to answer to this urgence is to "leave" without presence at the map the traffic signs without reviewing old items with this key=value.

The possibility of coexistence for both tags is only possible with tagging traffic signs ON the way, and not on the real location point (one of the options).

I know this is a topic some people understand it in a different ways since many years (my first proposal was written in 2017) but nowadays there is not an official position (I mean official proposal) yet. I think modifying the meaning of a "de facto" key=value for a item with nearly 1.5 million of elements and 15 years-old should need a proposal process with its steps and consequences. I hope you will be succesful.--Yopaseopor (talk) 21:09, 7 November 2025 (UTC)