[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Crossing cleanup and deprecation

[riiga]

2022-12-01 23:37 skrev Minh Nguyen:
> Vào lúc 02:08 2022-12-01, Volker Schmidt đã viết:
>> This proposal is incorrectly giving the impression that it is in the 
>> spirit of the crossing:markings tag.
>> This tag was meant to complement and refine the existing tagging of 
>> crossings in some cases, but certainly not to replace, wholesale the 
>> "crossing" key
>> The crossing:markings key describes the painting on the road surface, 
>> not the legal situation for the traffic participants, and it also 
>> leaves out the vertical signals (which BTW here in Italy have 
>> precedence over the horizontal signs in case of conflict)
> 
> The logical analogue to the successful crossing:markings=* proposal
> would be a proposal for a crossing:signals=* key that introduces
> options beyond what mappers can already express (in a Babelesque
> manner) using the various crossing=* tags -- without impinging on the
> entrenched interests behind crossing=zebra/uncontrolled/marked.
> 
> I'm working on such a proposal, in part to close a gap that mappers in
> my region experience acutely. [1] Unfortunately, I didn't manage to
> complete it before this more aggressive proposal went to an RfC. I
> just hope this proposed deprecation doesn't poison the well for
> crossing:signals=* once it's ready. The original 2019 proposal for
> crossing:signals=* made the same mistake of touching the sensitive
> crossing=* key.
> 
>> Also what is the meaning of crossing=no?
> 
> crossing=no is for where the road geometry etc. would suggest a
> pedestrian crossing but there isn't one. Some jurisdictions have
> standard signs for this situation. It's probably more common in
> regions where there are laws against jaywalking. If we're really
> serious about deprecating crossing=*, then a more systematized tag
> could be not:highway=crossing, now that the not:* prefix is fairly
> well-established.
> [1] 
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Crossing_signalization

Given the feedback and comments for this proposal, I don't intend on 
moving to voting. I will support your proposal to only approve 
crossing:signals (with extensions).