So... From what I'm reading here, the "hazard" is the makeup of the crossing itself, yes? And we could capture the attributes of the crossing through on-the-ground observations. Obviously it is ultimately the trains, but it's more that the design/implementation of the crossing could put you at risk.
Are the crossing IDs visible on-the-ground, just as bridge numbers are? They could be captured and the Network Rail data linked to by anyway strongly interested. I feel that the hazard ratings are probably made up of score per 'bad' attribute. On Sun, 9 Nov 2025, 16:37 Daniel Hatton via Talk-GB, < [email protected]> wrote: > On 09/11/2025 14:47, Andy Townsend wrote: > > > Even if that document isn't directly usable in OSM (and without other > > information we'd have to assume that it isn't) it still might be an > > excellent prompt for resurvey where information doesn't match OSM. For > > example, where OSM has a crossing as closed and Network Rail as open (or > > vice versa) it's likely that lots of other things in the area need > > remapping too. > > Certainly I find the particular crossing with which I started the thread > terrifying on visual assessment on site: user-operated gates with no > auto-lock on train approach, no warning lights, no audible warning. > > (The local education authority has very sensibly set a primary school > catchment boundary to coincide with the rail line to avoid children > having to cross it, but there's one LEA primary school west of the rail > line that nevertheless actively markets itself in residential areas east > of the rail line. Sigh.) > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-GB mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb >
_______________________________________________ Talk-GB mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
