2 meaning for crossing=zebra

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
78 messages Options
1234
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

2 meaning for crossing=zebra

marc marc
Hello,

I have a big issue with crossing=zebra.
it prevent to fill in the other value for crossing like
crossing=traffic_signals crossing=uncontrolled
the wiki [1] said that crossing=zebra is a shortchut for
crossing=uncontrolled + crossing_ref=zebra in the UK
but a lot of zebra also in UK and outside UK have traffic_signals
and must be tagged with crossing=traffic_signals
so at the end, crossing=zebra has no meaning... maybe the previous
contributor mean crossing=uncontrolled + crossing_ref=zebra
but maybe he mean only crossing_ref=zebra
I fix a few week a lot of crossing=zebra crossing_1=traffic_signals
or crossing=zebra;traffic_signals that show it's an issue.

a issue was closed in iD [2] some time ago because "the dev dislike
crossing_ref" (it is in fact a very ugly name for the tag)
right now josm [3] is changing preset to drop cossing_ref=zebra
in favor of crossing=zebra

I am part of a group of a group of mappers working on accessibility
are planning to open a talk to fix it but the news of the commit flow
preceded us

so my request is : how to avoid again a multi-meaning tag ?

may/must we separate the type of crossing from the ground marking ?
in short : move away crossing=zebra in another tag ? if yes
is crossing_Re so ugly than in the same time another tag need
to be used for the ground marking ?

let's avoid the argument of "there are too many cases to fix",
it doesn't scare me to propose a mass edition once a coherent scheme
has been found. but having half tools that fill a value with another
meaning than other or historical meaning is a big issue for the use
of the data.

[1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:crossing
[2] https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/issues/4788
[3] https://josm.openstreetmap.de/ticket/16793

Regards,
Marc
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 2 meaning for crossing=zebra

dieterdreist


sent from a phone

> On 25. Oct 2018, at 23:39, marc marc <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> I have a big issue with crossing=zebra.
> it prevent to fill in the other value for crossing like
> crossing=traffic_signals crossing=uncontrolled


if you see crossing=zebra as an alternative tagging for what the wiki suggests the misleading “uncontrolled”, there shouldn’t be more of a problem with the tag than without it. Uncontrolled is misleading because road markings are a kind of traffic control.

I agree that in areas where marked pedestrian crossings aren’t marked as zebra crossings, the tag could create problems or could not apply (I do not know about such places but someone wrote it in the wiki).

Having zebra markings on a traffic lights controlled crossing was mentioned as another issue, but I don’t see how this is a problem (you will add the most significant crossing control device (traffic lights)). Crossing=zebra means it is a zebra crossing, a traffic lights controlled crossing with zebra markings is traffic lights controlled.


Cheers, Martin
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 2 meaning for crossing=zebra

marc marc
Le 26. 10. 18 à 00:01, Martin Koppenhoefer a écrit :
> if you see crossing=zebra as an alternative tagging for what the wiki suggests the misleading “uncontrolled”

yes, it's one meaning currently described as "valid in the UK"
(crossing=zebra = crossing=uncontrolled + crossing_ref=zebra)

But "iD issue" is "load the aerial imagery, look for a zebra"
select a node, search for crossing, select "crossing(zebra)"
iD add highway=crossing crossing=zebra. upload the changeset.
iD never ask you if you known that no traffic light exist.
so it may be an alias for crossing=uncontrolled
but it may be also mean "crossing=* not requested to the mapper,
only the fact that the ground marking is a zebra
so don't try to find am advence meaning", the crossing type (light
or not) is unknown

It's why a just to move "the ground marking is a zebra" out
the crossing key.
With crossing_ref as currently described on the wiki,
a mapper can fill "the ground marking is a zebra" without
any "try to guesss if it's uncontrolled or not-filled" "meaning".
another 'll see that the crossing=* is not filled and may make
a survey or check a street-level imagery to add the missing info.

Regards,
Marc
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 2 meaning for crossing=zebra

Bryan Housel-2
In reply to this post by marc marc
Oh!  I don’t like `crossing=zebra` either.  Not sure whether you caught the end of that issue #4788, but anyway I've decided I'm tired of hearing people complain about `crossing=zebra` so going forward iD will support these 2 presets:

- `crossing=marked` which is labeled “Marked Crosswalk"  
- `crossing=unmarked` which is labeled “Unmarked Crossing”

`crossing=zebra` is still supported as a legacy, unsearchable preset, so things will still look the same.

(these changes will go live with the next version of iD, whenever that will be released)

thanks!
Bryan




> On Oct 25, 2018, at 5:39 PM, marc marc <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I have a big issue with crossing=zebra.
> it prevent to fill in the other value for crossing like
> crossing=traffic_signals crossing=uncontrolled
> the wiki [1] said that crossing=zebra is a shortchut for
> crossing=uncontrolled + crossing_ref=zebra in the UK
> but a lot of zebra also in UK and outside UK have traffic_signals
> and must be tagged with crossing=traffic_signals
> so at the end, crossing=zebra has no meaning... maybe the previous
> contributor mean crossing=uncontrolled + crossing_ref=zebra
> but maybe he mean only crossing_ref=zebra
> I fix a few week a lot of crossing=zebra crossing_1=traffic_signals
> or crossing=zebra;traffic_signals that show it's an issue.
>
> a issue was closed in iD [2] some time ago because "the dev dislike
> crossing_ref" (it is in fact a very ugly name for the tag)
> right now josm [3] is changing preset to drop cossing_ref=zebra
> in favor of crossing=zebra
>
> I am part of a group of a group of mappers working on accessibility
> are planning to open a talk to fix it but the news of the commit flow
> preceded us
>
> so my request is : how to avoid again a multi-meaning tag ?
>
> may/must we separate the type of crossing from the ground marking ?
> in short : move away crossing=zebra in another tag ? if yes
> is crossing_Re so ugly than in the same time another tag need
> to be used for the ground marking ?
>
> let's avoid the argument of "there are too many cases to fix",
> it doesn't scare me to propose a mass edition once a coherent scheme
> has been found. but having half tools that fill a value with another
> meaning than other or historical meaning is a big issue for the use
> of the data.
>
> [1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:crossing
> [2] https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/issues/4788
> [3] https://josm.openstreetmap.de/ticket/16793
>
> Regards,
> Marc
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 2 meaning for crossing=zebra

SelfishSeahorse
In reply to this post by marc marc
On Thu, 25 Oct 2018 at 23:40, marc marc <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> Hello,
>
> I have a big issue with crossing=zebra.
> it prevent to fill in the other value for crossing like
> crossing=traffic_signals crossing=uncontrolled
> the wiki [1] said that crossing=zebra is a shortchut for
> crossing=uncontrolled + crossing_ref=zebra in the UK
> but a lot of zebra also in UK and outside UK have traffic_signals
> and must be tagged with crossing=traffic_signals
> so at the end, crossing=zebra has no meaning... maybe the previous
> contributor mean crossing=uncontrolled + crossing_ref=zebra
> but maybe he mean only crossing_ref=zebra
> I fix a few week a lot of crossing=zebra crossing_1=traffic_signals
> or crossing=zebra;traffic_signals that show it's an issue.

What about tagging the presence or absence of traffic signals with a
subkey, e.g. crossing:traffic_signals=yes/no?

I've already proposed to replace crossing=island with
crossing:island=yes [1] for the same reason, that is, because when
using crossing=island, it's not possible to specify if the pedestrian
crossing is marked or not.

[1]: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Key:crossing:island

Regards
Markus

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 2 meaning for crossing=zebra

dieterdreist
In reply to this post by marc marc
Am Fr., 26. Okt. 2018 um 00:55 Uhr schrieb marc marc <[hidden email]>:
But "iD issue" is "load the aerial imagery, look for a zebra"
select a node, search for crossing, select "crossing(zebra)"
iD add highway=crossing crossing=zebra. upload the changeset.


it may work in some places, but where I map you cannot see the kind of crossing from aerial imagery, because traffic light controlled crossings also have zebra markings.


 
iD never ask you if you known that no traffic light exist.
so it may be an alias for crossing=uncontrolled


The term uncontrolled always bothered my as ill chosen, as it literally means no traffic control, while traffic control means policemen, traffic lights, traffic signs, road markings, i.e. the term is used against its natural meaning.
 

It's why a just to move "the ground marking is a zebra" out
the crossing key.


"crossing" is not about ground markings, but about the typology of the crossing. Ground markings may play a role, but they are not required (generally).

 
With crossing_ref as currently described on the wiki,
a mapper can fill "the ground marking is a zebra" without
any "try to guesss if it's uncontrolled or not-filled" "meaning".


you can do this is you want, personally I am not interested in the kind of markings, I only want to know what kind of crossing it is. A "zebra crossing" for me is a crossing with zebra markings and no traffic lights and zebra crossing traffic signs if away from a road crossing (Italian legal definition). I.e. the road markings alone don't define a zebra crossing (unless it is in proximity to a road crossing), vertical signs are required.

Cheers,
Martin

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 2 meaning for crossing=zebra

SelfishSeahorse
In reply to this post by dieterdreist
On Fri, 26 Oct 2018 at 00:02, Martin Koppenhoefer
<[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> I agree that in areas where marked pedestrian crossings aren’t marked as zebra crossings, the tag could create problems or could not apply (I do not know about such places but someone wrote it in the wiki).

There are some marked non-zebra crossings in Switzerland:

https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/zMqUsiFYNMiJ3_kA4ODHSQ
https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/OVsXNBwnJXFIAobJxFjUlQ

However, i'm unsure if vehicles have to stop there if pedestrians want
to cross. (Vehicles have to stop at the yellow 'zebra' crossings.)

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 2 meaning for crossing=zebra

SelfishSeahorse
In reply to this post by Bryan Housel-2
On Fri, 26 Oct 2018 at 01:19, Bryan Housel <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Oh!  I don’t like `crossing=zebra` either.  Not sure whether you caught the end of that issue #4788, but anyway I've decided I'm tired of hearing people complain about `crossing=zebra` so going forward iD will support these 2 presets:
>
> - `crossing=marked` which is labeled “Marked Crosswalk"
> - `crossing=unmarked` which is labeled “Unmarked Crossing”

If crossing=marked would exclude marked crossings with traffic
signals, that wouldn't solve the problem that Marc and i often come
across. If people see a marked crossing on the aerial imagery, they
would tag it crossing=marked, which would imply that this crossing
doesn't have traffic signals.

The problem with the crossing=* key is that it combines several
incompatible concepts, that is the presence or absence of traffic
signals, of road markings and of islands. It seems that the only
solution to this problem is moving all these properties to dedicated
subkeys, that is:

crossing:traffic_signals=yes/no
crossing:marked=yes/no
crossing:island=yes/no

Regards
Markus

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 2 meaning for crossing=zebra

Robert Skedgell
In reply to this post by marc marc


On 25/10/18 22:39, marc marc wrote:

> Hello,
>
> I have a big issue with crossing=zebra.
> it prevent to fill in the other value for crossing like
> crossing=traffic_signals crossing=uncontrolled
> the wiki [1] said that crossing=zebra is a shortchut for
> crossing=uncontrolled + crossing_ref=zebra in the UK
> but a lot of zebra also in UK and outside UK have traffic_signals
> and must be tagged with crossing=traffic_signals
> so at the end, crossing=zebra has no meaning... maybe the previous
> contributor mean crossing=uncontrolled + crossing_ref=zebra
> but maybe he mean only crossing_ref=zebra
> I fix a few week a lot of crossing=zebra crossing_1=traffic_signals
> or crossing=zebra;traffic_signals that show it's an issue.

Do you have any UK examples of zebra crossings with traffic signals?
From my understanding of UK traffic signs (which include road markings
and signals), this seems rather unlikely.

At a zebra crossing, vehicles must give precedence to pedestrians on the
crossing. No traffic signals are necessary to stop traffic in order for
pedestrians to cross.

It may be the case that there are zebra crossings very close to a
junction with traffic lights, but these are really separate entities and
should be mapped as such.

> a issue was closed in iD [2] some time ago because "the dev dislike
> crossing_ref" (it is in fact a very ugly name for the tag)
> right now josm [3] is changing preset to drop cossing_ref=zebra
> in favor of crossing=zebra

I agree with the ugliness of crossing_ref=zebra. NOw the wiki has been
updated, I can happily get rid of it in all my edits.

>
> I am part of a group of a group of mappers working on accessibility
> are planning to open a talk to fix it but the news of the commit flow
> preceded us
>
> so my request is : how to avoid again a multi-meaning tag ?
>
> may/must we separate the type of crossing from the ground marking ?
> in short : move away crossing=zebra in another tag ? if yes
> is crossing_Re so ugly than in the same time another tag need
> to be used for the ground marking ?
>
> let's avoid the argument of "there are too many cases to fix",
> it doesn't scare me to propose a mass edition once a coherent scheme
> has been found. but having half tools that fill a value with another
> meaning than other or historical meaning is a big issue for the use
> of the data.
>
> [1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:crossing
> [2] https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/issues/4788
> [3] https://josm.openstreetmap.de/ticket/16793
>
> Regards,
> Marc
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 2 meaning for crossing=zebra

dieterdreist
Am Fr., 26. Okt. 2018 um 10:28 Uhr schrieb Robert Skedgell <[hidden email]>:
At a zebra crossing, vehicles must give precedence to pedestrians on the
crossing. No traffic signals are necessary to stop traffic in order for
pedestrians to cross.

It may be the case that there are zebra crossings very close to a
junction with traffic lights, but these are really separate entities and
should be mapped as such.



I believe the main reason for using zebra markings at traffic signal controlled crossings in some places is that they will give precedence to pedestrians even when the lights are turned off.

Cheers,
Martin

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 2 meaning for crossing=zebra

Mateusz Konieczny-3
In reply to this post by marc marc
25. Oct 2018 23:39 by [hidden email]:

so my request is : how to avoid again a multi-meaning tag ?


Create multiple tags and do not attempt to create shortcut again.


In general crossing tag is attempting to tag several different things

at once - for example how I am supposed to tag crossing with island,

traffic lights and zebra markings in Poland?


may/must we separate the type of crossing from the ground marking ?


Yes. For example in Poland there are crossing markings that look

very similar and have the same name with different legal

implications.


People in that situation will use crossing=zebra, no matter what was

original intention of fist uers and what is documented on wiki

as the intended meaning,

 

it doesn't scare me to propose a mass edition once a coherent scheme
has been found.


Note that it is unfixable with mass edit. Resurvey of everything is basically needed.

And it is one more reason for people caring about this information to fix it as

soon as possible.


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 2 meaning for crossing=zebra

Robert Skedgell
In reply to this post by dieterdreist


On 26/10/18 09:34, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:

> Am Fr., 26. Okt. 2018 um 10:28 Uhr schrieb Robert Skedgell
> <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>:
>
>     At a zebra crossing, vehicles must give precedence to pedestrians on the
>     crossing. No traffic signals are necessary to stop traffic in order for
>     pedestrians to cross.
>
>     It may be the case that there are zebra crossings very close to a
>     junction with traffic lights, but these are really separate entities and
>     should be mapped as such.
>
> I believe the main reason for using zebra markings at traffic signal
> controlled crossings in some places is that they will give precedence to
> pedestrians even when the lights are turned off.
>

Thanks, Martin, that's a case which I wasn't aware of. Luckily for me,
it isn't one which can occur here in the UK. (See
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2016/362/schedule/14/made )

I wonder if it's possible differentiate between a normal traffic signal
controlled crossing, an uncontrolled zebra crossing and the type of
crossing you describe using appropriate values of traffic_sign=* ? I'm
making the possibly parochial assumption that traffic signals and road
markings are considered to be traffic signs in the jurisdictions concerned.

--
Robert Skedgell (rskedgell)



_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 2 meaning for crossing=zebra

dieterdreist
In reply to this post by Mateusz Konieczny-3


Am Fr., 26. Okt. 2018 um 11:12 Uhr schrieb Mateusz Konieczny <[hidden email]>:

In general crossing tag is attempting to tag several different things

at once - for example how I am supposed to tag crossing with island,

traffic lights and zebra markings in Poland?



in the simplest case (dual carriageway connected with traffic lights), you could tag them like this:

footway connecting the dual carriageway.

start and end node:
highway=crossing
crossing=traffic_signals

on the way:
highway=footway
footway=crossing
crossing=traffic_island

(for micromapping you might even split the footway, so that the traffic island part is only above the island)


While I would tag the kind of crossing, I would not usually tag the kind of road markings, but you could use any tag to do so, like
marking=zebra

A traffic light controlled crossing is not a zebra crossing, even if it has zebra markings (also here they do have zebra markings).

Cheers,
Martin


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 2 meaning for crossing=zebra

dieterdreist
In reply to this post by Robert Skedgell
Am Fr., 26. Okt. 2018 um 11:21 Uhr schrieb Robert Skedgell <[hidden email]>:

I wonder if it's possible differentiate between a normal traffic signal
controlled crossing, an uncontrolled zebra crossing and the type of
crossing you describe using appropriate values of traffic_sign=* ?


maybe, generally I would prefer to distinguish between vertical traffic signs and road markings in our tagging, as the former take precendence over markings.
Often there are also other signs on traffic signal controlled intersections, like stop or give way signs, which only go into effect in the case of the traffic lights turned off (common situation in Germany). Maybe someone is interested in finding a solution for these as well, or maybe it already exists?

Cheers,
Martin

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 2 meaning for crossing=zebra

Mateusz Konieczny-3
In reply to this post by dieterdreist
A traffic light controlled crossing is not a zebra crossing, even if it has zebra markings (also here they do have zebra markings)


And it may be root of problem. In Poland "zebra" is synonym of  "marked pedestrian crossing" - see
https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Przej%C5%9Bcie_dla_pieszych

No amount of documentation will protect from mappers using crossing=zebra.

Maybe crossing=united_kingdom_zebra would work.

markings=zebra is much better as mappers will be less likely to misinterpret (though
there may be other pitfalls).

26. Oct 2018 11:22 by [hidden email]:



Am Fr., 26. Okt. 2018 um 11:12 Uhr schrieb Mateusz Konieczny <[hidden email]>:

In general crossing tag is attempting to tag several different things

at once - for example how I am supposed to tag crossing with island,

traffic lights and zebra markings in Poland?



in the simplest case (dual carriageway connected with traffic lights), you could tag them like this:

footway connecting the dual carriageway.

start and end node:
highway=crossing
crossing=traffic_signals


Not on nodes shared by road and footway?

 

on the way:
highway=footway
footway=crossing
crossing=traffic_island


Tagging way crossing=traffic_island and nodes crossing=traffic_signals is

deeply not obvious.

 


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 2 meaning for crossing=zebra

dieterdreist
Am Fr., 26. Okt. 2018 um 11:30 Uhr schrieb Mateusz Konieczny <[hidden email]>:
Am Fr., 26. Okt. 2018 um 11:12 Uhr schrieb Mateusz Konieczny <[hidden email]>:

In general crossing tag is attempting to tag several different things

at once - for example how I am supposed to tag crossing with island,

traffic lights and zebra markings in Poland?



in the simplest case (dual carriageway connected with traffic lights), you could tag them like this:

footway connecting the dual carriageway.

start and end node:
highway=crossing
crossing=traffic_signals


Not on nodes shared by road and footway?



it is the same (see the assumption above). If sidewalks are mapped, the better description would indeed have been intersection of road with sidewalk.
 

 

on the way:
highway=footway
footway=crossing
crossing=traffic_island


Tagging way crossing=traffic_island and nodes crossing=traffic_signals is

deeply not obvious.


as I wrote, you could limit this to the part on the island.

Cheers,
Martin

 

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 2 meaning for crossing=zebra

max-2
In reply to this post by dieterdreist
On 26.10.18 11:27, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> Often there are also other signs on traffic signal controlled
> intersections, like stop or give way signs, which only go into effect in
> the case of the traffic lights turned off (common situation in Germany).
Just to clarify: In Germany you have either zebra markings or traffic
lights, NEVER both. Zebra marking means that road traffic has to stop
for pedestrians at any time.
I've seen in Spain that zebra markings were removed for crossings with
traffic lights, so maybe this is becoming more of a standard in other
places too.

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 2 meaning for crossing=zebra

SelfishSeahorse
In reply to this post by Mateusz Konieczny-3
On Fri, 26 Oct 2018 at 11:12, Mateusz Konieczny <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Yes. For example in Poland there are crossing markings that look
> very similar and have the same name with different legal
> implications.

Is there more than one marked crossings type w/o traffic signals in
Poland? That is, one where pedestrians have right of way and another
where vehicles have right of way?

Regards
Markus

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 2 meaning for crossing=zebra

SelfishSeahorse
In reply to this post by Mateusz Konieczny-3
On Fri, 26 Oct 2018 at 11:30, Mateusz Konieczny <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Tagging way crossing=traffic_island and nodes crossing=traffic_signals is
> deeply not obvious.

+1. That's too complicated. Furthermore it doesn't work on
one-carriageway roads like e.g. here:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/893451214

Regards
Markus

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 2 meaning for crossing=zebra

Robert Skedgell
In reply to this post by dieterdreist


On 26/10/18 10:27, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:

> Am Fr., 26. Okt. 2018 um 11:21 Uhr schrieb Robert Skedgell
> <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>:
>
>
>     I wonder if it's possible differentiate between a normal traffic signal
>     controlled crossing, an uncontrolled zebra crossing and the type of
>     crossing you describe using appropriate values of traffic_sign=* ?
>
>
>
> maybe, generally I would prefer to distinguish between vertical traffic
> signs and road markings in our tagging, as the former take precendence
> over markings.

I did say I risked being parochial in my assumptions :-)

In the UK road markings are also traffic signs and an upright sign does
not necessarily take precedence. For example, the give way transverse
road marking (= = = = =) is required whether the red inverted triangle
upright sign is present or not. Failure to comply with either is an offence.

> Often there are also other signs on traffic signal controlled
> intersections, like stop or give way signs, which only go into effect in
> the case of the traffic lights turned off (common situation in Germany).
> Maybe someone is interested in finding a solution for these as well, or
> maybe it already exists?

More of a headache than I imagined.

--
Robert Skedgell (rskedgell)


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
1234