[Tagging] Do we map pedestrian crossings twice?

Clifford Snow clifford at snowandsnow.us
Wed Jun 10 16:17:23 UTC 2020

On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 8:44 AM Jack Armstrong <jacknstacy at sprynet.com>

> Thank you, Andrew,
> According to the "Sidewalk as a separate way" proposal, which was approved
> in 2011,
> When a highway=crossing node is present on the main road, a way connecting
> the sidewalks on the two sides of the road should be mapped. Not to
> override the well-established meaning of highway=crossing, this way should
> be tagged as follows:
> highway=footway
> footway=crossing
> However, the OSM wiki “tag:highway=crossing” directly contradicts this;
> To map a pedestrian crossing, place a node within the way representing the
> road, and set this highway=crossing tag on the node…
> footway=crossing and cycleway=crossing are sometimes used on ways which
> lead from a sidewalk to the crossing node (the node which has this
> highway=crossing tag). *This is not the preferred way of tagging.*
> Is this a simple case of information not being transferred from the
> approved proposal to the wiki?
> I have no preference on how a pedestrian crossing is mapped, but I am keen
> for the wiki to reflect accurate information. If we are following the
> approved proposal "Sidewalk as a separate way”, does anyone have objection
> to the wiki being changed to reflect this?

Before changing the wiki, I'd like a clearer understanding of your proposed
change. As I read this the node is placed on the highway to tell cars that
some type of crossing is located at this node. The crossing way tells the
pedestrian that there is some type of crossing.  With thousands of
crossings already mapped, your proposed change could break routers.

OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20200610/fe76bb8a/attachment-0001.htm>

More information about the Tagging mailing list