On 25/05/19 07:32, Paul Allen wrote:
On Fri, 24 May 2019 at 22:12, Kevin Kenny <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Yeah, there really are combinations around here:
does it have signs?
does it have traffic signals?
does it have specific pedestrian-facing traffic signals? (Some
intersections just have you cross at the same time as motor traffic in
your direction rolls)
are the traffic signals pedestrian- or cyclist-controlled? (Is there a
button for you to push?)
does it have pavement markings?
We also have;
tactile paving - a sequence of small raised bumps/dots on the paving
that can be sensed by walkers/wheelchairs
audio warning - the button also has an audio output that signals when
the traffic lights state to allow pedestrian crossing, and just before
the pedestrian crossing closes.
Some of those can probably be simplified away. Like the push button.
It may
seem like a major difference but in actuality on some crossings the ONLY
purpose of the push button is to light the sign saying "Wait" and the
crossing
cycle is determined by some combination of timing and traffic flow.
I'd say that traffic/pedestrian signals is the key factor for
crossing=traffic_signals,
irrespective of road decoration even if that road decoration modifies
the meaning
of the signals in some way (it's effectively no different from a sign
on a pole).
A marked crossing doesn't have traffic signals. An unmarked crossing
doesn't
even have markings.
Pavement markings, tactile pavements, dropped kerbs, etc are all
attributes. They
don't turn it into a different type of crossing or (except possibly in
Poland) affect the
interactions between pedestrians and motorists. Nice to map, but as a
clarification,
not a primary feature.
I'm fine with leaving crossing=* as it is for legacy compatibility,
but we *do* want to move toward orthogonality, since that's what we've
got on the ground.
I'm not yet convinced there's orthogonality in crossing type (except
possibly in Poland).
A crossing where the lights mean one thing and the road markings mean
a different
thing doesn't strike me as being even remotely workable: the road
markings tell the
pedestrians they have right of way irrespective of the lights and a
green light tells
the motorist he has right of way. That's no way to run a crossing.
What we may need to do is expand on crossing_ref (maybe with a
different name) to cope
with all the regional differences. "This is a crossing controlled by
lights which just happens
to have zebra stripes, but those stripes do not carry any legal
meaning and are purely
decorative" We almost certainly do need to distinguish between
Pelican and Puffin crossings
in the UK because, although they look almost identical, the light
sequences and regulations
differ. Etc.
--
Paul
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
