<html>
  <head>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
  </head>
  <body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 25/05/19 07:32, Paul Allen wrote:<br>
    </div>
    <blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAPy1dO+2gaMm0KDf41yitwS9sPzC2jt3=OR4VuhFR+_KT6HFmg@mail.gmail.com">
      <meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
      <div dir="ltr">
        <div dir="ltr">On Fri, 24 May 2019 at 22:12, Kevin Kenny <<a
            href="mailto:kevin.b.kenny@gmail.com" moz-do-not-send="true">kevin.b.kenny@gmail.com</a>>
          wrote:<br>
        </div>
        <div class="gmail_quote">
          <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
            0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
            rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><br>
            Yeah, there really are combinations around here:<br>
            <br>
            does it have signs?<br>
            does it have traffic signals?<br>
            does it have specific pedestrian-facing traffic signals?
            (Some<br>
            intersections just have you cross at the same time as motor
            traffic in<br>
            your direction rolls)<br>
            are the traffic signals pedestrian- or cyclist-controlled?
            (Is there a<br>
            button for you to push?)<br>
            does it have pavement markings?<br>
          </blockquote>
        </div>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
    <br>
    We also have;<br>
    tactile paving - a sequence of small raised bumps/dots on the paving
    that can be sensed by walkers/wheelchairs<br>
    audio warning - the button also has an audio output that signals
    when the traffic lights state to allow pedestrian crossing, and just
    before the pedestrian crossing closes.<br>
    <blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAPy1dO+2gaMm0KDf41yitwS9sPzC2jt3=OR4VuhFR+_KT6HFmg@mail.gmail.com">
      <div dir="ltr">
        <div class="gmail_quote">
          <div><br>
          </div>
          <div>Some of those can probably be simplified away.  Like the
            push button.  It may</div>
          <div>seem like a major difference but in actuality on some
            crossings the ONLY</div>
          <div>purpose of the push button is to light the sign saying
            "Wait" and the crossing</div>
          <div>cycle is determined by some combination of timing and
            traffic flow.</div>
          <div><br>
          </div>
          <div>I'd say that traffic/pedestrian signals is the key factor
            for crossing=traffic_signals,</div>
          <div>irrespective of road decoration even if that road
            decoration modifies the meaning</div>
          <div>of the signals in some way (it's effectively no different
            from a sign on a pole).</div>
          <div>A marked crossing doesn't have traffic signals.  An
            unmarked crossing doesn't</div>
          <div>even have markings.<br>
          </div>
          <div><br>
          </div>
          <div>Pavement markings, tactile pavements, dropped kerbs, etc
            are all attributes.  They</div>
          <div>don't turn it into a different type of crossing or
            (except possibly in Poland) affect the</div>
          <div>interactions between pedestrians and motorists.  Nice to
            map, but as a clarification,</div>
          <div>not a primary feature.<br>
          </div>
          <div><br>
          </div>
          <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
            0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
            rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">I'm fine with leaving
            crossing=* as it is for legacy compatibility,<br>
          </blockquote>
          <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
            0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
            rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
            but we *do* want to move toward orthogonality, since that's
            what we've<br>
            got on the ground.<br>
          </blockquote>
          <div><br>
          </div>
          <div>I'm not yet convinced there's orthogonality in crossing
            type (except possibly in Poland).</div>
          <div>A crossing where the lights mean one thing and the road
            markings mean a different</div>
          <div>thing doesn't strike me as being even remotely workable:
            the road markings tell the</div>
          <div>pedestrians they have right of way irrespective of the
            lights and a green light tells</div>
          <div>the motorist he has right of way.  That's no way to run a
            crossing.<br>
          </div>
          <div><br>
          </div>
          <div>What we may need to do is expand on crossing_ref (maybe
            with a different name) to cope</div>
          <div>with all the regional differences.  "This is a crossing
            controlled by lights which just happens</div>
          <div>to have zebra stripes, but those stripes do not carry any
            legal meaning and are purely</div>
          <div>decorative"  We almost certainly do need to distinguish
            between Pelican and Puffin crossings</div>
          <div>in the UK because, although they look almost identical,
            the light sequences and regulations</div>
          <div>differ.  Etc.</div>
          <div><br>
          </div>
          <div>-- <br>
          </div>
          <div>Paul</div>
          <div><br>
          </div>
        </div>
      </div>
      <br>
      <fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
      <br>
      <pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Tagging@openstreetmap.org">Tagging@openstreetmap.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging</a>
</pre>
    </blockquote>
    <p><br>
    </p>
  </body>
</html>