[Tagging] Use of crossing:island where crossings and islands are mapped separately
Jeroen Hoek
mail at jeroenhoek.nl
Tue Sep 27 07:30:45 UTC 2022
> Where there is a crossing with traffic islands, but the highways forming the crossings and crossing the islands are mapped separately, my assumption has been that crossing:island=no is the correct tagging.
I agree. My understanding is that you can provide information about
pedestrian refuges at a crossing in two ways:
* By adding crossing:island=yes to the crossing node, and mapping the
whole crossing from side to side with footway=crossing on the crossing
way, including across the traffic island(s)
* By mapping the crossing separately leaving crossing:island out (or
using 'no'), and mapping the actual crossing bits with separate
footway=crossing on the ways between side(s) and traffic island(s)
It is my understanding that crossing:island=* only says something about
the crossing way it sits on (ideally, tagged with footway=crossing), not
all the crossings part of an intersection.
I've started using footway=traffic_island on the highway=footway for the
bits in between (the 'pedestrian refuges' or 'traffic islands'). This
helps other mappers understand the crossing and prevent accidental
joining of the ways. For data consumers interested in accessibility, the
mapped length of the actual crossings (tagged with footway=crossing and
one or more highway=crossing nodes where ways/lanes intersect) can be
interesting (e.g., for routers to penalize very long crossings without
traffic islands).
> I haven't used footway|cycleway=traffic_island on the ways crossing the
> islands, possibly because JOSM and/or Osmose (incorrectly?) complain.
> Perhaps I should?
JOSM should have stopped complaining about this by now. Values for
footway=* where whitelisted due to a period where values for sidewalk=*
where put in footway=* instead (e.g., footway=left). This is still part
of the validation, but other footway-values are now treated as
user-defined, which is in line with how footway=* is used.
Does Osmose complain about these?
More information about the Tagging
mailing list