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

[Paul Allen]

On Fri, 24 May 2019 at 21:19, Mateusz Konieczny <matkoniecz at tutanota.com>
wrote:

>
> Can you have zebra stripes without lights or are they only ever present
> with lights?
> You can have zebra stripes with lights and without lights.
>
> If you can have zebra stripes without lights that mean something different
> to zebra stripes
> with lights, that could be a problem for the blind.
>
> Main difference is that without traffic lights who can move depends on
> situation
> (neither drivers nor pedestrians have absolute priority), with lights who
> can legally enter
> is marked by traffic lights.
>
> If zebras only occur in Poland with lights then it's just a
> crossing=traffic_lights.
>
> Unfortunately - not only.
>

OK then, you've said you can have lights without stripes.  Is there any
legal difference in
the way pedestrians/motorists interact with and without stripes?  If not,
then the stripes are
cosmetic, not functional.

However, they still pose a problem for the blind.  With macular
degeneration you might be
able to make out stripes but not see the signals.  Which would mean that
without OSM
making a distinction they wouldn't know which type of crossing it was.  But
right now they
have that problem anyway, and if it was a serious concern I'd hope Poland
would have
done something about it by now.  If I understand correctly, they don't have
right of way
in stripes alone and only have right of way at lights if the light changes
and/or audible or
other alert, so they're not going to walk into traffic whichever type of
crossing they encounter.

-- 
Paul
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20190524/706784fd/attachment.html>