Talk:Tag:crossing=marked
Marked by signage
Came up recently - here a picture of a crossing, that is marked by a sign, no road markings though - In my jurisdiction, road markings and traffic signs are considered functionally the same. Unlike others, I do not consider this an unmarked crossing. Do we map that there is paint on the road, or do we map that there is a pedestrian crossing, that enjoys the pedestrians a special status? The sign itself does not show a zebra crossing, which is the usual road marking here for the purpose. I have never witnessed such a sign on the ground. Maybe that depends on jurisdiction, and the sign is just a warning to drivers, that there may be pedestrians ahead. Yet it suspiciously looks like the signs posted, where there are actually protected crossings. --Hungerburg (talk) 22:52, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
- "The sign itself does not show a zebra crossing" - in Poland traffic sign about pedestrian crossings always looks like this Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 17:31, 11 October 2021 (UTC)
- Looking at the photo once more, there are three of those signs, the other two both have ground markings. Perhaps. this is just an anecdote, a one-off, where somebody forgot something, so not much worth discussing. In Austria I never happened on this, sign only. It is always either both, or just road markings.--Hungerburg (talk) 16:42, 11 October 2021 (UTC)
- "this is just an anecdote, a one-off, where somebody forgot something" - it is deliberate with this road having (1) lower traffic (2) in a cultural/heritage area Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 17:31, 11 October 2021 (UTC)
- Sound reasons, for marking this "unmarked", indeed. --Hungerburg (talk) 19:42, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
- "this is just an anecdote, a one-off, where somebody forgot something" - it is deliberate with this road having (1) lower traffic (2) in a cultural/heritage area Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 17:31, 11 October 2021 (UTC)
- All these reasons are why I dislike crossing=*marked. Not only is it not able to show the traffic control method and differentiate between various markings (where they will have different legal meanings and physical visibility), it is also unable to intuitively accommodate signs and implicit marking by contrasting surfacing. If you look at Proposed_features/crossing=marked#Examples, this is already a traffic_calming=table. In other places, the speed bump/hump/table may have height difference markings. ---- Kovposch (talk) 06:06, 11 October 2021 (UTC)
- Eg the original author suggested this to be crossing_ref=ladder. It's not a vastly different crosswalk functionality, only a certain marking. I suppose it should be something like road_marking=ladder, so your question could be highway=crossing + traffic_sign=* + road_marking=no.
- Cf https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/highway=stop#combinations 1011 road_marking=* and 256665 traffic_sign=*, https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/highway=give_way#combinations 1722 road_marking=* and 18862 traffic_sign=* instances. As of now, 1099 https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/highway=crossing#combinations instances has some kind of traffic_sign=* tagged on it.
- ---- Kovposch (talk) 06:27, 11 October 2021 (UTC)
- If I would be inventing tagging I would have crossing:road_markings=* and maybe crossing:traffic_sign=*. This specific one I would mark crossing=unmarked but I am not expecting consistency Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 07:07, 11 October 2021 (UTC)
- OSM sometimes is like the real world, a conundrum from things that came to be. Therefore, if I were to invent tagging, I'd stick with crossing_ref=traffic_sign_only. --Hungerburg (talk) 19:42, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
