[Tagging] automated edits seem to remove crossing=zebra drastically

António Madeira antoniomadeira at gmx.com
Thu Sep 17 01:39:39 UTC 2020


I do believe that uncontrolled should be deprecated in favour of marked,
which iD already did. I also agree that marked/unmarked was a good
improved in the crossing scheme, but it should be cleared on the wiki
page, which seems to favour the uncontrolled tag.
About your considerations:

1 - That depends on the country. For example, in Portugal, all crossings
have right of way over vehicles. So, marking a crossing is the same
whatever the type you map (besides unmarked, of course)

2 - I think there area already tags for all that. You can check them
here under "Additional tags":
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:crossing

3 - Same as previous point.

4 - In the same page, under "Mode of transport"

5 - There's also reference to that in the page, but I agree this is not
very clear and is scattered in several wikis, like this:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:footway%3Dcrossing

Regards,
António


Às 21:40 de 16/09/2020, Taskar Center escreveu:
> Hi,
>
> crossing has been a very poor tag because it seems to be the kitchen
> sink for all the questions pertaining to crossings...
> Many of the attributes that get values in "crossing" are potentially
> overlapping and not mutually exclusive, causing a lot of confusion and
> poorly tagged crossings. Nevertheless, specifying crossings is very
> important because it's a highly contested street region.
>
> The crossing tag has held many values that may overlap, and we should
> once and for all split out all these different tags so we can be
> mapping what we mean and mean what we map.
> Questions we should be answering when mapping a crossing:
> 1) How is this shared space controlled? A crossing is a high risk
> environment where traversal is shared between cars and pedestrians
> (they are of unequal footing). So the type of 'control' and 'right of
> way' in that space is important to specify. 'uncontrolled' is a very
> bad tag in this direction because it has an actual legal,
> non-intuitive meaning and many mappers mistakenly think a crossing
> that has no traffic signal is uncontrolled- so that's a really bad tag.
> crossing_control= ?
>
> 2) How is the space demarcated? A crossing may be demarcated by a
> number of different ground markers, it may also be physically
> demarcated from other street environments by raised footway, tactile
> paving or reflectors.
> crossing_ref=? (for visual demarcation)
> additional tag for physical demarcation?
> (I'm in disagreement with those saying it's superfluous or hard to tag
> this way)
>
> 3) How can a pedestrian call up the signal and how can they sense
> whose right of way is currently allowed?
> Is there a call button? Does it chirp, speak out, vibrate?
>
> 4) who is sharing the way (also a bicycle crossing, animal crossing, etc)?
>
> 5) How is the space connected to the rest of the transportation layer?
> to the pedestrian layer? Crossings should really only extend from curb
> to curb, so that the kerb could be properly tagged for its physical
> characteristics. The habit of extending crossings all the way into and
> overlapping with sidewalk spaces is a pretty bad idea considering
> those are protected pedestrian spaces and have very semantic meaning
> to pedestrians than the high risk crossing environment.
>
> I think crossing=marked/unmarked was a really good step in the
> direction of getting resolution and refinement on at least one of
> these questions above. We should now move together to refine the
> definitions and values for these other questions...
>
> Best,
> Anat
>
>
>
> Sent from my mobile. Please excuse brevity and typos.
> On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 4:41 PM Clifford Snow <clifford at snowandsnow.us
> <mailto:clifford at snowandsnow.us>> wrote:
>
>
>
>     On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 2:46 PM Graeme Fitzpatrick
>     <graemefitz1 at gmail.com <mailto:graemefitz1 at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>         I must admit that I only do crossings as =traffic_signals;
>         =marked (by itself) for zebra crossings; & =unmarked where
>         there is provision to cross the road but no signage or roadway
>         markings on any sort.
>
>
>     I do crossings as crossing=marked/unmarked. I believe software
>     should be able to identify if the crossing has a stop sign or
>     traffic signal. Pedestrian walk/don't walk are low on my radar
>     right now.
>
>     I stopped using zebra since they seemed more appropriate for a
>     crossing in England than where I live in the US.
>     Crossing=marked/unmarked the only thing I see where I map them.
>
>     BTW - I believe in the US hitting a pedestrian in a marked
>     crossing is illegal most everywhere. In some cities, drivers seem
>     to believe they have the right of way over pedestrians, even if
>     they are in a marked crossing.
>
>     In another country I've spent some time in, cars definitely have
>     the right of way over pedestrians.
>     --
>     @osm_washington
>     www.snowandsnow.us <https://www.snowandsnow.us>
>     OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch
>     _______________________________________________
>     Tagging mailing list
>     Tagging at openstreetmap.org <mailto:Tagging at openstreetmap.org>
>     https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20200916/f11412fe/attachment.htm>


More information about the Tagging mailing list