[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC (etc) for crossing:signals

[Joseph Eisenberg]

In the United States an unmarked crosswalk is usually legally identical to
a crosswalk marked with painted stripes. Vehicle drivers and bike riders
must stop for a pedestrian in a crosswalk whether there is paint or not. In
general, all places where there is a sidewalk on both sides of an
intersection are an unmarked crosswalk, even if there is not a dropped kerb
(curb). I believe this is a general rule, but it is certainly true in  the
western States.

On Wed, May 8, 2019 at 6:37 PM Mateusz Konieczny <matkoniecz at tutanota.com>
wrote:

> 8 May 2019, 01:30 by nbolten at gmail.com:
>
> - Unmarked crossings are abstract "fictions" representing where an
> individual might cross the street, marked crossings are identifiable from
> imagery.
> - Because unmarked crossings are "fictions", they are only suggested
> places to cross, according to the mapper. In contrast, marked crossings are
> "official".
>
> Just because mapping something requires real survey rather than mapping
> from aerial imagery is
> not making it fictional or unofficial.
>
> - Marked crossings are one of the few pedestrian spaces that can be
> straightforwardly considered as a linear feature: it connects spaces across
> a street.
>
> Typical footway is also linear.
>
> - Marked crossings tend to have legal implications, as you note.
>
> Unmarked crossings may also have legal implications (for example in
> Poland).
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20190508/032d4868/attachment.html>