[Tagging] What qualifies as crossing=unmarked

[Mateusz Konieczny]

And I am likely influenced by legal situation in Poland which is quite
pedestrian-hostile (though it gets better year by year)

For example pedestrian crossings on a crossing of roads
have special legal status (you can cross there), even if not marked
at all in any way.

Oct 10, 2021, 10:34 by jez.nicholson at gmail.com:

> Personally, and influenced by UK law that you may cross the road [almost] anywhere you like, I believe case 1 is the only unmarked crossing here. An unmarked crossing is a planners way to increase safety by influencing behaviour. A straight section of inner city pavement has lowered kerb to encourage pedestrians to cross at that point (plus make it accessible).
>
> Where I live, all corners are being lowered to make them more accessible. That doesn't make every corner in town a pedestrian crossing. It's totally normal for people to cross there, they haven't been specifically encouraged to go there.
>
> On Sat, 9 Oct 2021, 20:56 Jeroen Hoek, <> mail at jeroenhoek.nl> > wrote:
>
>> Cases 1 and 3 are what I would consider cases of crossing=unmarked.
>>  These are places designed as pedestrian crossing places with
>>  accessibility in mind. They lack road markings, but the lowered kerbs
>>  make it clear that this is where you would cross if you were in a
>>  wheelchair or pushing a pram. When sidewalks are mapped separately, this
>>  is where you would want to have them cross the street.
>>  
>>  Case 2, the driveway, not really. In fact, the sidewalk/pavement
>>  continues over the driveway, which in many jurisdictions means that
>>  pedestrians have right of way, and the the sidewalk is not interrupted.
>>  The driveway is crossing the sidewalk, not the other way around. No tag
>>  necessary I think when the way is a highway=service.
>>  
>>  When the way is highway=residential or higher, some tag to indicate this
>>  kind of 'sidewalk continues uninterrupted, street crosses it' is lacking
>>  I think. These are common in the Netherlands, for example:
>>  
>>  >> https://postimg.cc/k6HpPxHK
>>  
>>  The sidewalk (and the cycleway) continue across that side street running
>>  of to the top of the photograph. I wouldn't tag these with
>>  crossing=unmarked, but some tag for these is missing.
>>  
>>  Case 4 lacks a clear place to cross. It is up to the pedestrian
>>  themselves to choose where. In these cases crossing=unmarked does not
>>  feel appropriate. I don't know if some other crossing-tag would be
>>  useful for this. Personally I tag the section of highway=footway
>>  crossing here with footway=link (continuing with footway=sidewalk after
>>  leaving the carriage way) to indicate that this is a crossing mapped for
>>  routing purposes, but that it lacks a formal on the ground crossing
>>  place (for places where crossing=* is appropriate footway=crossing is
>>  used). Mapping the kerbs in these cases seems helpful for wheelchair
>>  users too.
>>  
>>  I'm basing this mainly based on this criterium from the
>>  crossing=unmarked documentation:
>>  
>>  > By a structural measure the transition should be recognizable. 
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>  _______________________________________________
>>  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/20211010/a1d845c8/attachment.htm>