Feature Proposal - crossing=marked
Locked
Feature Proposal - crossing=marked –
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/crossing%3Dmarked
Hello, fellow tagging enthusiasts! At long last, and after many discuss...
Loading...
sent from a phone
> On 7. May 2019, at 22:57, Nick Bolten <nbolten@...> wrote:
>
> One of the primary confusions is the "u...
Loading...
> they are also intended to mean: not controlled by a traffic light (while
„marked“ likely would include traffic light crossings)
Yes, but ...
Loading...
On Thu, 9 May 2019 at 23:26, Nick Bolten <nbolten@...> wrote:
>
> Yes, but a traffic light for whom? I've seen mappers who assume ...
Loading...
This all makes sense, but the question is: what does
crossing=traffic_lights mean given these contexts? There are at least 3
types of lights and...
Loading...
On Fri, 10 May 2019 at 19:27, Nick Bolten <nbolten@...> wrote:
> This all makes sense, but the question is: what does
> crossing=t...
Loading...
I still don't know when you think we should use crossing=traffic_signals...
Imagine you're outside the UK. Pelican signals don't exist. No anim...
Loading...
On Fri, 10 May 2019 at 21:03, Nick Bolten <nbolten@...> wrote:
> I still don't know when you think we should use crossing=traffic_sign...
Loading...
>> - A crossing might be marked on the ground
> Are there traffic signals which control BOTH traffic and pedestrians? If
so,
> c...
Loading...
On Fri, 10 May 2019 at 23:59, Nick Bolten <nbolten@...> wrote:
> >> - A crossing might be marked on the ground
>
> > ...
Loading...
> I would not expect to see something like that, in any of its regional
variations (green walking person/red stationary person in much of Euro...
Loading...
On Sat, 11 May 2019 at 01:09, Nick Bolten <nbolten@...> wrote:
> > I would not expect to see something like that, in any of its reg...
Loading...
> If the light is purely a warning to both traffic and pedestrians, then
it's not crossing=traffic_signals. If it controls both traffic and
p...
Loading...
sent from a phone
> On 12. May 2019, at 21:27, Nick Bolten <nbolten@...> wrote:
>
> Regarding an "uncontrolled pedestrian ...
Loading...
This discussion is leaving me pretty bewildered.
Sometimes my bewilderment can be alleviated by considering concrete examples.
On my walk yester...
Loading...
I agree that it's very confuddled. I'm going to start a new thread soon
after I make some updates to the proposal, primarily for clarity and
cov...
Loading...
Forgot that part:
> On my walk yesterday, other than the implied crossing at every
> intersection (but see "don't map local law")...
Loading...
On Tue, 14 May 2019 at 05:10, <osm.tagging@...> wrote:
I must admit that I only map crossings when they are between formed
footpaths eg
...
Loading...
Haven’t checked if it shows up as an error, but technically, the grass on each side is the “sidewalk”, and it is simply a shortcoming of the curre...
Loading...
On 14/05/19 17:14, osm.tagging@... wrote:
>
> Haven’t checked if it shows up as an error, but technically, the grass
> on each side i...
Loading...
On Tue, 14 May 2019 at 17:23, Warin <61sundowner@...> wrote:
> On 14/05/19 17:14, osm.tagging@... wrote:
>
> Haven’t checked i...
Loading...
When mapping in Japan, I map all sidewalks. as a Califorinian, where sidewalks are common and usually follow the road alignment at all times, I un...
Loading...
On Tue, 14 May 2019 at 05:10, <osm.tagging@...> wrote:
>
> I must admit that I only map crossings when they are between formed
>...
Loading...
On Tue, 14 May 2019 at 18:38, Volker Schmidt <voschix@...> wrote:
> NB: This crossing is not mapped correctly in OSM as there is no co...
Loading...
sent from a phone
On 14. May 2019, at 02:24, Graeme Fitzpatrick <graemefitz1@...> wrote:
>> https://cdn.discordapp.com/attac...
Loading...
People do generally walk on this “grass” sidewalk.
From: Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdreist@...>
Sent: Tuesday, 14 May 2019 16:04
...
Loading...
sent from a phone
> On 14. May 2019, at 09:16, <osm.tagging@...> <osm.tagging@...> wrote:
>
> People do generally walk on...
Loading...
> 1. Combined foot/cycle crossing - a side path from a combined
> foot/cycleway onto a very lightly trafficked suburban street. Marked
> ...
Loading...
sent from a phone
> On 12. May 2019, at 21:27, Nick Bolten <nbolten@...> wrote:
>
> It's easy to sympathize: we've got a tag ab...
Loading...
sent from a phone
> On 11. May 2019, at 00:57, Nick Bolten <nbolten@...> wrote:
>
> If only one or the other, it is not a cross...
Loading...
> you have still to show us a crossing with traffic lights only for
pedestrians :)
Having trouble finding a good picture (I'll keep looking...
Loading...
sent from a phone
> On 11. May 2019, at 01:42, Nick Bolten <nbolten@...> wrote:
>
> Having trouble finding a good picture (I'll...
Loading...
> hm, would you consider these traffic lights, or not? It basically depends
on this interpretation whether you should use a different tag or w...
Loading...
Do we map the pedestrian aspects of traffic light controlled crossings?
i.e the Walk/DontWalk or the Green/Red figures?
As a pedestrian I have u...
Loading...
On Sun, 12 May 2019 at 10:47, Tony Shield <tony.shield999@...> wrote:
> Do we map the pedestrian aspects of traffic light controlled c...
Loading...
On Sat, 11 May 2019 at 00:44, Nick Bolten <nbolten@...> wrote:
> Having trouble finding a good picture (I'll keep looking), but there ...
Loading...
> I'd still classify that as crossing=traffic_signals.
Ah, now I'm super confused. I would've sworn that you'd recommend mapping
that as un...
Loading...
Le 07.05.19 à 22:57, Nick Bolten a écrit :
> - crossing=* values are not truly orthogonal and this needs to be
> addressed. e.g., "u...
Loading...
I don't know why we need a new tag scheme.
I remember my explanation of the question and the adaptation of the
possibilities. I repeat them he...
Loading...
> I don't know why we need a new tag scheme.
Please check out my proposal, as I've laid out several reasons. As someone
who has personally ...
Loading...
I have checked out your proposal...and I don't know what is the difference
with a crossing=marked (yours) and a crossing=uncontrolled (in OSM)
I...
Loading...
> I have checked out your proposal...and I don't know what is the
difference with a crossing=marked (yours) and a crossing=uncontrolled (in
O...
Loading...
> If there is not any control of the crossing...yes otherwise should be
crossing=traffic_signals or supervised=yes as you can read in the wiki...
Loading...
No, don't be innocent
If you search traffic light you will see the same thing, not any strange
light in relation with traffic itself.
https:/...
Loading...
> If you search traffic light you will see the same thing, not any strange
light in relation with traffic itself.
https://www.google.com/sear...
Loading...
sent from a phone
> On 10. May 2019, at 23:17, yo paseopor <yopaseopor@...> wrote:
>
> A mark is not a control. A sign is not a...
Loading...
On Thu, 9 May 2019 at 23:46, Nick Bolten <nbolten@...> wrote:
>
> I don't know what it means for a crossing to be supervised,
>...
Loading...
On Thu, 9 May 2019 at 03:38, yo paseopor <yopaseopor@...> wrote:
> zebra is marked but uncontrolled
>
Maybe (quite possibly!) I...
Loading...
On 08/05/2019 22:48, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:
> I thought that controlled means that their is signage / indication of
> some form that say...
Loading...
This subthread is doing a good job of showing why "uncontrolled" is opaque
to users and mappers, as it is primarily an issue of local l...
Loading...
On Wed, May 8, 2019 at 2:48 PM Graeme Fitzpatrick <graemefitz1@...>
wrote:
>
> Now we may (yet again!) be getting caught up in th...
Loading...
Le 08.05.19 à 19:37, yo paseopor a écrit :
> zebra is marked but uncontrolled (if it is controlled you can use other
> value)
but if y...
Loading...
> I suggest that you read the discussion I started in December
about crossing=zebra because it is the main cause of the current situation.
...
Loading...
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |