Hello,
Le 10.06.20 à 04:03, Jack Armstrong a écrit :
> Users have been adding pedestrian crossing tags on ways
I don't see 2 crossing.
I only see 1 crossing https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/7598863281
between a footway https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/813492687
and a tertiary road
From: Clifford Snow Jack - can you live with Martin's point?
Actually, I'm very flexible with just about anything. My only goal in bringing this up was to clean up the wiki page so that mappers have clear guidance. The way the wiki was written seemed confusing. After I brought up the subject I
Jun 11, 2020, 01:10 by ja...@piorkowski.ca:
> On Wed, 10 Jun 2020 at 14:27, Clifford Snow wrote:
>
>> To help me understand, below are three schemes for crossings. Which one(s)
>> best describe your suggested way of mapping.
>>
>> ...
>> 2. With no crossing ways, just a node on the highway
On Wed, 10 Jun 2020 at 14:27, Clifford Snow wrote:
> To help me understand, below are three schemes for crossings. Which one(s)
> best describe your suggested way of mapping.
>
> ...
> 2. With no crossing ways, just a node on the highway to mark the type of
> crossing
Às 19:29 de 10/06/2020, Graeme Fitzpatrick escreveu:
On Thu, 11 Jun 2020 at 06:30, Clifford Snow mailto:cliff...@snowandsnow.us>> wrote:
Sorry - I should have been clearer on #3. The red dot is a
validation warning that the two ways intersect, but it isn't
marked as a
On Thu, 11 Jun 2020 at 06:30, Clifford Snow wrote:
>
>
> Sorry - I should have been clearer on #3. The red dot is a validation
> warning that the two ways intersect, but it isn't marked as a crossing.
>
(Not having a go at you, Clifford, just using your comment as an example!
:-))
"Recently"
Jack - can you live with Martin's point?
On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 2:36 PM Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
>
>
> sent from a phone
>
> > On 10. Jun 2020, at 23:28, Clifford Snow
> wrote:
> >
> > I would suggest that the one feature per element page needs to include a
> couple of exceptions to the
sent from a phone
> On 10. Jun 2020, at 23:28, Clifford Snow wrote:
>
> I would suggest that the one feature per element page needs to include a
> couple of exceptions to the rule.
the rule is mostly pointless, because it depends what you define as a feature.
In the crossing example
On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 1:55 PM Jack Armstrong
wrote:
>
> From: Clifford Snow
>
> If we were to follow your logic, then every level crossing at the
> intersection of railways and highways should not be tagged as a
> level_crossing because of the rule "one feature, one OSM element."
>
>
> Well,
Jun 10, 2020, 23:17 by dieterdre...@gmail.com:
>
>
> sent from a phone
>
>
>> On 10. Jun 2020, at 18:19, Clifford Snow wrote:
>>
>> Before changing the wiki, I'd like a clearer understanding of your proposed
>> change.
>>
>
>
> this sentence was only introduced recently, it is not backed by
sent from a phone
> On 10. Jun 2020, at 18:19, Clifford Snow wrote:
>
> Before changing the wiki, I'd like a clearer understanding of your proposed
> change.
this sentence was only introduced recently, it is not backed by history,
current usage or the people in this thread here. Just
sent from a phone
> On 10. Jun 2020, at 20:28, Clifford Snow wrote:
>
> 1. Tagging both the crossing and a node on the highway.
> https://mycloud.snowandsnow.us/index.php/s/YEFoYcTgR2gtW3j
> 2. With no crossing ways, just a node on the highway to mark the type of
> crossing
From: Clifford Snow If we were to follow your logic, then every level crossing at the intersection of railways and highways should not be tagged as a level_crossing because of the rule "one feature, one OSM element."
Well, again, my personal preferences are not germane to this thread. I'm not shy
Às 17:16 de 10/06/2020, Jack Armstrong escreveu:
From: Clifford Snow
To help me understand, below are three schemes for crossings.
Which one(s) best describe your suggested way of mapping.
1. Tagging both the crossing and a node on the highway.
On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 1:16 PM Jack Armstrong
wrote:
> From: Clifford Snow
> To help me understand, below are three schemes for crossings. Which one(s)
> best describe your suggested way of mapping.
>
> 1. Tagging both the crossing and a node on the highway.
>
From: Clifford Snow To help me understand, below are three schemes for crossings. Which one(s) best describe your suggested way of mapping.1. Tagging both the crossing and a node on the highway. https://mycloud.snowandsnow.us/index.php/s/YEFoYcTgR2gtW3j2. With no crossing ways, just a node on the
FWIW, as the originating party for the “sidewalk as separate way” proposal, we
have actually been mapping and tagging both the pedestrian crossing line
geometry as well as the intersecting node geometry with the crossing
demarcation.
Moreover, we highly recommend using the tag
Crossing=
Jun 10, 2020, 19:59 by jacknst...@sprynet.com:
>
> To be added to the wiki (from the approved proposal):
>
>
>
>
>
> When a highway=crossing node is present on the main road, a way connecting
> the sidewalks on the two sides of the road should be mapped. This way should
> be tagged as
Jun 10, 2020, 20:26 by cliff...@snowandsnow.us:
> To help me understand, below are three schemes for crossings. Which one(s)
> best describe your suggested way of mapping.
>
> 1. Tagging both the crossing and a node on the highway. >
> https://mycloud.snowandsnow.us/index.php/s/YEFoYcTgR2gtW3j
On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 10:59 AM Jack Armstrong
wrote:
> > From: Clifford Snow
>
> > Before changing the wiki, I'd like a clearer understanding of your
> proposed change. As I read this the node is placed on the highway to tell
> cars that some type of crossing is located at this node. The
> From: Clifford Snow> Before changing the wiki, I'd like a clearer understanding of your proposed change. As I read this the node is placed on the highway to tell cars that some type of crossing is located at this node. The crossing way tells the pedestrian that there is some type of crossing.
On Wed, 10 Jun 2020 at 17:45, Jack Armstrong wrote:
> To map a pedestrian crossing, place a node within the way representing
> the road, and set this highway=crossing tag on the node…
> footway=crossing and cycleway=crossing are sometimes used on ways which
> lead from a sidewalk to the
On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 8:44 AM Jack Armstrong
wrote:
> Thank you, Andrew,
>
> According to the "Sidewalk as a separate way" proposal, which was approved
> in 2011,
>
> When a highway=crossing node is present on the main road, a way connecting
> the sidewalks on the two sides of the road should
I agree that the wiki should be consistent on the use of these two ways
of mapping a highway crossing.
Personally, I always use highway=crossing on nodes and only
footway=crossing when I can connect the point to a pedestrian feature
for routing purposes.
Às 12:44 de 10/06/2020, Jack Armstrong
Thank you, Andrew,According to the "Sidewalk as a separate way" proposal, which was approved in 2011, When a highway=crossing node is present on the main road, a way connecting the sidewalks on the two sides of the road should be mapped. Not to override the well-established meaning of
On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 9:03 PM Jack Armstrong
wrote:
> Users have been adding pedestrian crossing tags on ways in addition to the
> street connecting nodes. In effect, a single pedestrian crossing is tagged
> twice. To me, this would seem contrary not only to the OSM wiki page,
>
Am Mi., 10. Juni 2020 um 14:09 Uhr schrieb Kevin Kenny <
kevin.b.ke...@gmail.com>:
> As far as I know, all routers need the node if they're going to, for
> instance, present a warning to an approaching motorist or cyclist that
> the crossing is impending. But some attributes of the crossing (most
On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 1:54 AM Andrew Davidson wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 12:04 PM Jack Armstrong
> wrote:
>>
>> I’ve been told by a user, anecdotally, there’s a Slack group that decided
>> this is correct. To my knowledge Slack groups do not supersede the OSM wiki.
>> I assume
On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 12:04 PM Jack Armstrong
wrote:
> I’ve been told by a user, anecdotally, there’s a Slack group that decided
> this is correct. To my knowledge Slack groups do not supersede the OSM
> wiki. I assume mapping a crossing twice is incorrect?
>
I don't know if it is "correct"
Apologies if this has already been discussed. I searched the tagging list, but couldn’t find it.
Users have been adding pedestrian crossing tags on ways in addition to the street connecting nodes. In effect, a single pedestrian crossing is tagged twice. To me, this would seem contrary not only
30 matches
Mail list logo
