Re: [Tagging] unmarked crossing, tactile paving, lowered kerbs / was: 2 meaning for crossing=zebra

[Paul Allen]

On Sat, Oct 27, 2018 at 9:29 AM SelfishSeahorse 
wrote:

>
> Note that similar unmarked crossings with lowered kerbs are also
> common in Europe, e.g. see:
>
> UK: https://goo.gl/maps/uYcJsED8QLr
>

Those are very common in my (small) town, except that only two of them have
traffic islands.
The traffic island makes it very obviously a crossing, and traffic islands
were used for
crossings before tactile/lowered paving became the norm.  But tactile
paving alone makes a
crossing.

-- 
Paul
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] unmarked crossing, tactile paving, lowered kerbs / was: 2 meaning for crossing=zebra

[Mateusz Konieczny]

I would be happy to make research from Poland.
OSM wiki is likely the best place - please post a link once you create it and 
describe 
the situation in your country!
 

27. Oct 2018 08:21 by yopaseo...@gmail.com :


> It could be interesting to every people of every system (continent perhaps?) 
> describes our crossings and make a big global proposal that counts every 
> system.> What do you think about that?
> yopaseopor
>
> On Sat, Oct 27, 2018 at 8:08 AM Graeme Fitzpatrick <> graemefi...@gmail.com 
> > > wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, 27 Oct 2018 at 15:27, yo paseopor <>> yopaseo...@gmail.com 
>> >> > wrote:
>>
>>> For me it is an unmarked cross . I think it is very common in the USA. May 
>>> we have to ask ourselves in every land how the local administration deal 
>>> with putting crossings in our streets. I think the way it is done in Europe 
>>> and in the USA is different.
>>
>> Also very common in Australia, & by the sound of the conversation that's 
>> been going on, our crossings & markings are also very different to Europe!
>> Thanks
>> Graeme>>  >> ___
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org 
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging 
>> 
>>___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] unmarked crossing, tactile paving, lowered kerbs / was: 2 meaning for crossing=zebra

[Peter Elderson]

IMO, Absence of an implied barrier (kerb) does not make it a special type of 
crossing. If the footpath is explicitly mapped over the crossroad and there is 
a barrier for wheelchairs etc, I would expect to tag the barrier itself, or the 
linking node, or the road section of the footpath for wheelchairs etc to 
indicate that wheelchair routers cannot route over the barrier, linking node or 
footpath section.

If no kerb is mapped, no lowered kerb needs to be mapped either. Default 
presence of kerbs could be deduced from context, but then the context would 
need to be explicitly mapped.

If you only map what is actually there, everyone can draw their own conclusions 
from the actual situation. Conclusions regarding access, priority and 
accessibility could differ among countries but there is no need to tag for 
different countries, customs, expectations and legislations.

Just thinking. 

Mvg Peter Elderson

> Op 27 okt. 2018 om 02:04 heeft Graeme Fitzpatrick  het 
> volgende geschreven:
> 
> 
> 
>> On Sat, 27 Oct 2018 at 08:44, Peter Elderson  wrote:
>> I would not tag that as a crossing for pedestrians at all.
> 
> Why not, Peter?
> 
> It is designed for wheelchairs, people with prams etc to easily get from one 
> footpath across to the next footpath, without having to get over a kerb.
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Graeme 
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] unmarked crossing, tactile paving, lowered kerbs / was: 2 meaning for crossing=zebra

[SelfishSeahorse]

On Sat, 27 Oct 2018 at 07:27, yo paseopor  wrote:
>
> For me it is an unmarked cross . I think it is very common in the USA. May we 
> have to ask ourselves in every land how the local administration deal with 
> putting crossings in our streets. I think the way it is done in Europe and in 
> the USA is different.

Note that similar unmarked crossings with lowered kerbs are also
common in Europe, e.g. see:

UK: https://goo.gl/maps/uYcJsED8QLr
CH: https://goo.gl/maps/zKXbDjy2qP72

Regards
Markus

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] unmarked crossing, tactile paving, lowered kerbs / was: 2 meaning for crossing=zebra

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

On Sat, 27 Oct 2018 at 16:22, yo paseopor  wrote:

> It could be interesting to every people of every system (continent
> perhaps?) describes our crossings and make a big global proposal that
> counts every system.
> What do you think about that?
>

Wow - big job!!!

Where would you even start listing it all - an OSM wiki?

Could be done I guess, probably starting a State basis, then combining that
info into a National set. Think that Australia would be the only place that
you'd ever get a Continent wide answer of any sort, & even then there'd be
lot's of variations!

Thanks

Graeme

>
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] unmarked crossing, tactile paving, lowered kerbs / was: 2 meaning for crossing=zebra

[yo paseopor]

It could be interesting to every people of every system (continent
perhaps?) describes our crossings and make a big global proposal that
counts every system.
What do you think about that?

yopaseopor

On Sat, Oct 27, 2018 at 8:08 AM Graeme Fitzpatrick 
wrote:

>
>
> On Sat, 27 Oct 2018 at 15:27, yo paseopor  wrote:
>
>> For me it is an unmarked cross . I think it is very common in the USA.
>> May we have to ask ourselves in every land how the local administration
>> deal with putting crossings in our streets. I think the way it is done in
>> Europe and in the USA is different.
>>
>
> Also very common in Australia, & by the sound of the conversation that's
> been going on, our crossings & markings are also very different to Europe!
>
> Thanks
>
> Graeme
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] unmarked crossing, tactile paving, lowered kerbs / was: 2 meaning for crossing=zebra

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

On Sat, 27 Oct 2018 at 15:27, yo paseopor  wrote:

> For me it is an unmarked cross . I think it is very common in the USA. May
> we have to ask ourselves in every land how the local administration deal
> with putting crossings in our streets. I think the way it is done in Europe
> and in the USA is different.
>

Also very common in Australia, & by the sound of the conversation that's
been going on, our crossings & markings are also very different to Europe!

Thanks

Graeme
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] unmarked crossing, tactile paving, lowered kerbs / was: 2 meaning for crossing=zebra

[yo paseopor]

For me it is an unmarked cross . I think it is very common in the USA. May
we have to ask ourselves in every land how the local administration deal
with putting crossings in our streets. I think the way it is done in Europe
and in the USA is different.

yopaseopor


On Sat, Oct 27, 2018 at 2:05 AM Graeme Fitzpatrick 
wrote:

>
>
> On Sat, 27 Oct 2018 at 08:44, Peter Elderson  wrote:
>
>> I would not tag that as a crossing for pedestrians at all.
>>
>
> Why not, Peter?
>
> It is designed for wheelchairs, people with prams etc to easily get from
> one footpath across to the next footpath, without having to get over a kerb.
>
> Thanks
>
> Graeme
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] unmarked crossing, tactile paving, lowered kerbs / was: 2 meaning for crossing=zebra

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

On Sat, 27 Oct 2018 at 08:44, Peter Elderson  wrote:

> I would not tag that as a crossing for pedestrians at all.
>

Why not, Peter?

It is designed for wheelchairs, people with prams etc to easily get from
one footpath across to the next footpath, without having to get over a kerb.

Thanks

Graeme
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] unmarked crossing, tactile paving, lowered kerbs / was: 2 meaning for crossing=zebra

[Peter Elderson]

I would not tag that as a crossing for pedestrians at all.

Mvg Peter Elderson

> Op 27 okt. 2018 om 00:14 heeft Graeme Fitzpatrick  het 
> volgende geschreven:
> 
>> On Sat, 27 Oct 2018 at 01:01, Tom Pfeifer  wrote:
>> On 26.10.2018 16:41, Robert Skedgell wrote:
>> > On 26/10/18 11:44, Tom Pfeifer wrote:
>> >> Tagging "unmarked crossings" does not make sense for me. An unmarked
>> >> crossing is defined in OSM by a road and a footway sharing a node, there
>> >> is no need for a tag here, as there is nothing special.
>> > 
>> > An unmarked crossing may have no road markings or signs, but if there is
>> > tactile paving and/or a raised/lowered/flush kerb on the footway
>> > (sidewalk), how else would one tag it?
> 
> So how would you tag this situation:  
> https://www.google.com/maps/@-28.0707782,153.4362109,3a,75y,140.17h,73.2t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s0bHjLjjqqe1rrdNWfLu94g!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo1.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3D0bHjLjjqqe1rrdNWfLu94g%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D296.4197%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656
> 
> There is a footpath along the side of the road, which drops to road level via 
> a lowered kerb, to meet up with another lowered kerb on the other side of the 
> road. There are no signs or markings of any sort.
> 
> I map them as crossing=unmarked
> 
> Any other suggestions?
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Graeme
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] unmarked crossing, tactile paving, lowered kerbs / was: 2 meaning for crossing=zebra

[Bryan Housel]

> So how would you tag this situation:  
> https://www.google.com/maps/@-28.0707782,153.4362109,3a,75y,140.17h,73.2t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s0bHjLjjqqe1rrdNWfLu94g!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo1.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3D0bHjLjjqqe1rrdNWfLu94g%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D296.4197%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656
>  
> 
> 
> There is a footpath along the side of the road, which drops to road level via 
> a lowered kerb, to meet up with another lowered kerb on the other side of the 
> road. There are no signs or markings of any sort.
> 
> I map them as crossing=unmarked

You got it - good example of a `crossing=unmarked`.  
These are very common in the US suburbs.

Thanks, Bryan


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] unmarked crossing, tactile paving, lowered kerbs / was: 2 meaning for crossing=zebra

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

On Sat, 27 Oct 2018 at 01:01, Tom Pfeifer  wrote:

> On 26.10.2018 16:41, Robert Skedgell wrote:
> > On 26/10/18 11:44, Tom Pfeifer wrote:
> >> Tagging "unmarked crossings" does not make sense for me. An unmarked
> >> crossing is defined in OSM by a road and a footway sharing a node, there
> >> is no need for a tag here, as there is nothing special.
> >
> > An unmarked crossing may have no road markings or signs, but if there is
> > tactile paving and/or a raised/lowered/flush kerb on the footway
> > (sidewalk), how else would one tag it?
>

So how would you tag this situation:
https://www.google.com/maps/@-28.0707782,153.4362109,3a,75y,140.17h,73.2t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s0bHjLjjqqe1rrdNWfLu94g!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo1.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3D0bHjLjjqqe1rrdNWfLu94g%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D296.4197%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656

There is a footpath along the side of the road, which drops to road level
via a lowered kerb, to meet up with another lowered kerb on the other side
of the road. There are no signs or markings of any sort.

I map them as crossing=unmarked

Any other suggestions?

Thanks

Graeme
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] unmarked crossing, tactile paving, lowered kerbs / was: 2 meaning for crossing=zebra

[Robert Skedgell]

On 26/10/18 16:00, Tom Pfeifer wrote:
> On 26.10.2018 16:41, Robert Skedgell wrote:
>> On 26/10/18 11:44, Tom Pfeifer wrote:
>>> Tagging "unmarked crossings" does not make sense for me. An unmarked
>>> crossing is defined in OSM by a road and a footway sharing a node, there
>>> is no need for a tag here, as there is nothing special.
>>
>> An unmarked crossing may have no road markings or signs, but if there is
>> tactile paving and/or a raised/lowered/flush kerb on the footway
>> (sidewalk), how else would one tag it?
> 
> These are clearly markings for me, the tactile pavings are typically
> white and even visible in aerial imagery. Thus "unmarked crossing" is
> wrong. The tag is tactile_paving=*, used 300k.

In the UK they are pale red on marked crossings (zebra, pelican, toucan,
etc.) and pale yellow at unmarked/uncontrolled crossings. They are not
traffic signs (in the legal sense), they are consequently not designed
to be clearly visible to road users and are only mentioned briefly in
the part of the Highway Code directed at pedestrians (rule 10). I would
say that for any practical purposes, these are unmarked from the
perspective of a road user travelling along the way, but not from the
perspective of a pedestrian crossing the way.

> The question is then, should they be mapped on the road or where they
> are, at the kerb?
> 
> For the lowered kerbs, they should be mapped as lowered kerbs, there is
> a tag for them, kerb=lowered, used 100k.

If they are mapped as kerb=* + tactile_paving=yes at the kerb line, then
there may be a crossing node on the highway as highway=crossing +
crossing=*. At the moment, crossing=unmarked seems to be the least
inappropriate common value here.

-- 
Robert Skedgell (rskedgell)


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

[Tagging] unmarked crossing, tactile paving, lowered kerbs / was: 2 meaning for crossing=zebra

[Tom Pfeifer]

On 26.10.2018 16:41, Robert Skedgell wrote:

On 26/10/18 11:44, Tom Pfeifer wrote:

Tagging "unmarked crossings" does not make sense for me. An unmarked
crossing is defined in OSM by a road and a footway sharing a node, there
is no need for a tag here, as there is nothing special.


An unmarked crossing may have no road markings or signs, but if there is
tactile paving and/or a raised/lowered/flush kerb on the footway
(sidewalk), how else would one tag it?


These are clearly markings for me, the tactile pavings are typically white and even visible in 
aerial imagery. Thus "unmarked crossing" is wrong. The tag is tactile_paving=*, used 300k.


The question is then, should they be mapped on the road or where they are, at 
the kerb?

For the lowered kerbs, they should be mapped as lowered kerbs, there is a tag for them, 
kerb=lowered, used 100k.


tom

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging