Proposal:Crossing=priority
| crossing=priority | |
|---|---|
| Proposal status: | Canceled (inactive) |
| Proposed by: | IpswichMapper |
| Tagging: | crossing=priority |
| Applies to: | |
| Definition: | Add the tag crossing=priority to describe crossings that give pedestrians priority |
| Statistics: |
|
| Draft started: | 2020-12-13 |
| RFC start: | 2020-12-13 |
Proposal
Use the tag, "crossing=priority", to describe pedestrian crossings that specifically give right of way to pedestrians over vehicles on a road from the moment they have indicated their intent to cross. Used in conjunction with highway=crossing. This is called a "zebra crossing" in the United Kingdom.
If this proposal is accepted, crossing=uncontrolled will now describe pedestrian crossings where vehicles have right of way and pedestrians have to wait until it is possible to cross.
Also, if this proposal is accepted, after a while, once crossing=zebra have changed to either crossing=uncontrolled or crossing=priority, it might be good idea to depreciate crossing=zebra entirely.
Rationale
Currently no tag exists to specifically describe a crossing that gives pedestrians right of way. crossing=zebra is considered "outdated" and has different uses. For example, use of this tag almost certainly means pedestrian right of way in England, however in other parts of the world it may simply describe crossings with a striped pattern (but not rights of way toward pedestrians).
The replacement iD proposes, crossing=marked, isn't clearer at all. In fact, the crossing=* page marks this tag as a "duplicate" of crossing=uncontrolled, which, again, does not explain if pedestrians have priority.
This proposal would give a tag which clearly indicates right of way for pedestrians.
Potentially, the tag belisha_beacon=yes could be used to indicate if a crossing has belisha beacons. However, in countries like the UK, where belisha beacons are used, every single zebra crossing has belisha beacons installed, so there is no need to tag them (crossing=priority should suffice).
Examples
Tagging
| Value | Description |
|---|---|
| crossing=priority | Indicates that the node is a pedestrian crossing where pedestrians have priority over vehicles on the road from the moment they have indicated their intent to cross. |
| belisha_beacon=(yes/no) | Indicates the presence of a "belisha beacon" at the crossing. (Most likely unnecessary, discuss below) |
bicycle=boolean (yes/no) |
(default is no) A value of yes means that pedal cyclists are permitted to ride across the crossing.
|
horse=boolean (yes/no) |
(default is no) A value of yes means that horse riders are permitted to ride across the crossing.
|
segregated=boolean (yes/no) |
(no default assumed) A value of yes indicates that crossing traffic of differing types is segregated from each other (there is a separate crossing area for each mode of transport). For example, horse and foot traffic is sometimes segregated within a UK Pegasus Crossing.
|
crossing_ref=name |
where name is the traditional, region-specific reference, such as zebra or pelican.
|
Rendering
A "zebra crossing icon" should suffice.
Applies to
Can be applied to:
Features/Pages affected
- highway=crossing
- footway=crossing
- cycleway=crossing
- crossing=*
- crossing=priority
- crossing=uncontrolled (now only describes crossings where pedestrians don't have right of way)
- crossing=zebra (direct people towards the crossing=priority tag)
External discussions
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2020-December/056783.html
Nabble link (same discussion as above, but presented in a more readable format):
http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Feature-Proposal-RFC-crossing-priority-td5979662.html
There is much more discussion in these mailing lists than in the Talk Page.
REASON FOR CANCELLATION:
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2020-December/057071.html
Comment
Please comment on the discussion page.