<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
You could use "crossing:belisha_beacon" (like crossing:island etc.),
but I don't think it has to be part of the proposal. In my area we
started to use "crossing:kerb_extension" and
"crossing:buffer_markings" this year, see here:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Berlin/Verkehrswende/Fu%C3%9Fwege#Gehwegvorstreckung">https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Berlin/Verkehrswende/Fu%C3%9Fwege#Gehwegvorstreckung</a>
(still under development and unfortunately only in German language
at the moment)<br>
<p><br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Am 13.12.20 um 21:06 schrieb
ipswichmapper--- via Tagging:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:MOShUb9--3-2@tutanota.com">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">Yes, most likely this won't be required. However I have kept it there in case it works differently in other countries. Maybe not all zebra crossings in Singapore have belisha beacons (for example, I don't know if this is true). That is why I am leaving it open for discussion for now, if after the RFC it is decided that this is a bad idea I'll remove it.
Thanks,
IpswichMapper
--
13 Dec 2020, 19:50 by <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:tagging@openstreetmap.org">tagging@openstreetmap.org</a>:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">It seems to be proposing also belisha_beacon=yes that
is now unused
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org//search?q=belisha_beacon%3Dyes">https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org//search?q=belisha_beacon%3Dyes</a>
At the same time it has
"However, in countries like the UK, where belisha beacons are used, every
single zebra crossing has belisha beacons installed, so there is no need to tag them"
There is also
"Indicates the presence of a "belisha beacon" at the crossing. (Most likely unnecessary, discuss below)"
Given there is no indication that it would be useful or needed I think
that it should be not proposed.
If that it would be useful or needed it can be proposed separately.
Note that having two proposals in one will result in people voting against
if there are against any of them, so splitting would be a good idea
anyway.
Dec 13, 2020, 20:25 by <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:tagging@openstreetmap.org">tagging@openstreetmap.org</a>:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap=""><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/crossing%3Dpriority">https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/crossing%3Dpriority</a> <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/crossing%3Dpriority#Tagging"><https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/crossing%3Dpriority#Tagging></a>
Here is my first proposal for a tag to describe pedestrian crossings where the pedestrian has right of way over all vehicles on the road from the moment they have indicated their intent to cross. I created this because "crossing=zebra" or "crossing=marked" aren't clear enough. Please read the proposal for more details.
Thanks,
IpswichMapper
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">
</pre>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<pre class="moz-quote-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>
</body>
</html>