[Tagging] Do we map pedestrian crossings twice?

[Clifford Snow]

On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 1:16 PM Jack Armstrong <jacknstacy at sprynet.com>
wrote:

> From: Clifford Snow
> To help me understand, below are three schemes for crossings. Which one(s)
> best describe your suggested way of mapping.
>
> 1. Tagging both the crossing and a node on the highway.
> https://mycloud.snowandsnow.us/index.php/s/YEFoYcTgR2gtW3j
> 2. With no crossing ways, just a node on the highway to mark the type of
> crossing https://mycloud.snowandsnow.us/index.php/s/4ad5wLzMNcE3sNo
> 3. With just crossing ways and no node at the intersection of the crossing
> and highway. https://mycloud.snowandsnow.us/index.php/s/tHF62pH5txPEX55
>
>
> Well, since you asked, as to my own personal preference,
>
> #1 is not my preference. Crossing tags are placed on the way and on a node
> for a single pedestrian crosswalk. I feel this violates OSM's "one feature,
> one OSM element" rule.
> #2 seems acceptable, but it's not my personal preference. (Again, I
> started this thread not in order to express my preferences, simply to have
> the wiki compliant with approved OSM canon)
> #3 has no connecting node between the two ways represented by the red dot?
> This would not be correct. There should be a connecting node.
>
> Sorry - I should have been clearer on #3. The red dot is a validation
warning that the two ways intersect, but it isn't marked as a crossing.

If we were to follow your logic, then every level crossing at the
intersection of railways and highways should not be tagged as a
level_crossing because of the rule "one feature, one OSM element."

Best,
Clifford

-- 
@osm_washington
www.snowandsnow.us
OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20200610/6eaec1bf/attachment.htm>