In Nederland, zebra or zebra-path means just the striped pattern. No signs or signals are implied. It's the only named type of crossing*, everybody knows it. crossing=zebra is perfect for that; WYSIWIM (What You See Is What You Map). Very straightforward. Signals and signs may be present, but in no way do they define the crossing, so they have to be mapped as separate objects or attributes.
* Traffic experts may have many more names, just none that the general public knows. Fr gr Peter Elderson > Op 29 nov. 2022 om 11:06 heeft Minh Nguyen <[email protected]> het > volgende geschreven: > > Vào lúc 23:01 2022-11-28, Martin Koppenhoefer đã viết: >>>> On 29 Nov 2022, at 00:52, Minh Nguyen <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Even if it weren't for iD's long-gone preset, I don't think an ostensibly >>> global tag should be defined based on the narrow provisions of a specific >>> country's laws. >> I don’t think this is about a specific country, although it is not about all >> countries there are many of them that apply the concept and that seem to >> have decided on the feature in 1949 in an international agreement. > > No zebras were harmed in the drafting of either the 1949 Geneva Protocol on > Road Signs and Signals [1] or the 1978 Vienna Convention on Road Signs and > Signals [2]. Neither treaty mentions this species by name, but the national > laws of some parties to the Vienna Convention do define zebra crossings. > > For example, the UK requires zebra crossings to have alternating stripes as > well as belisha beacons. [3] Other countries, such as Vietnam, use the term > "zebra" specifically for the striped marking pattern > (crossing:markings=zebra), by contrast with two parallel lines > (crossing:markings=lines), but make no other provisions apart from what any > crossing would have. [4] Meanwhile, here in the U.S., which is not a party to > the convention, we walk on a distinct species of "zebra crossing" that has > slanted stripes. What was the problem with crossing_ref=zebra again? > > What you seem to be suggesting is that the definition of crossing=zebra > should favor the regulations of some parties to the Vienna Convention over > other parties to the convention, let alone other countries that use the term > "zebra" to refer to something slightly different. This is unsustainable. At > one point, it might've been reasonable to justify the use of one national > definition as a historical accident, based on squatter's rights. But since > then, for better or worse, that definition has been overwhelmed by usage that > we can't characterize as cleanly. > > Mappers benefit when they can be confident that others will look at their > tagging later on and interpret it consistent with their original intention. > Someone using crossing=zebra today shouldn't be under any illusion that it > means anything more specific than a marked crossing in practice. In that > light, crossing=zebra deserves to be given the same deference as > crossing=marked. > > [1] > <https://treaties.un.org/doc/Treaties/1953/12/19531220%2000-10%20AM/Ch_XI_B_1_2_3.pdf> > [2] https://unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/trans/conventn/signalse.pdf#page=7 > [3] > <https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/851465/dft-traffic-signs-manual-chapter-6.pdf#page=127> > [4] > <https://luatvietnam.vn/giao-thong/quy-chuan-ky-thuat-qcvn-41-2019-bgtvt-bao-hieu-duong-bo-186000-d3.html>, > p. 20; search for "vạch ngựa vằn", literally "zebra stripes" > > -- > [email protected] > > > > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
