[Tagging] Non-orthogonal crossing=* tag proposals: crossing=marked/unmarked vs crossing:markings=yes/no

[Kevin Kenny]

On Fri, May 24, 2019 at 4:09 PM <osm.tagging at thorsten.engler.id.au> wrote:
> The way I see it:

> crossing=no – crossing here is not legal/possible

> crossing=unmarked – there are no road markings (or traffic signals) that indicate this is a designated crossing, but based on other factors, it’s a location where pedestrians common cross, e.g. because of lowered kerbs, or because the sidewalk on one side of the road ended

> crossing=uncontrolled – there are road markings indicating this is a designated pedestrian crossing, but no traffic signals that explicitly tell pedestrians when they have to stop

> crossing=traffic_signals – there are explicit traffic signals that tell pedestrians when to stop. There are very likely road markings, but even if not, the absence of road markings, in the presence of actual traffic signals, is irrelevant for how this crossing operates.

Does any of this change in a jurisdiction where there is an implied
crossing at every intersection unless posted otherwise?

What sort of feature gets tagged crossing=no? Does one draw a line or
node to represent the footway that isn't there?