[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - crossing=priority

[Peter Elderson]

Just to clarify:

> crossing=priority Indicates that the node is a pedestrian crossing  ....
when applied to highway=cycleway, should this read bicycle crossing?

when applied to a highway=cycleway, does the tag imply priority for
cyclists, pedestrians, or both?

> belisha_beacon=yes|no
Is belisha beacon a generally known term outside the UK?
Since only presence is significant,  the value no is useless

> segregated=boolean (yes/no) (no default assumed)

Since the proposal talks about pedestrians, cycleways and horses crossing:
what exactly is segregated when segregated=yes is applied to a cycleway?
And with segregated=no, do motorists get a warning that horses may cross on
the cycleway?


Peter Elderson


Op zo 13 dec. 2020 om 21:08 schreef ipswichmapper--- via Tagging <
tagging at openstreetmap.org>:

> 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 tagging at openstreetmap.org:
>
> It seems to be proposing also belisha_beacon=yes that
> is now unused
> https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org//search?q=belisha_beacon%3Dyes
>
> 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 tagging at openstreetmap.org:
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/crossing%3Dpriority
> <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/crossing%3Dpriority#Tagging>
>
> 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
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20201213/ae5bde27/attachment.htm>