Am 25.05.2019 um 12:48 schrieb osm.tagg...@thorsten.engler.id.au: > > Yes, but that’s not the point. > > > > The presence or absence of markings do not change the fundamental > operating principle of the crossing (go only when it’s green). > > > > The strips shown in the image you linked do not mean that pedestrians > have priority here and can just walk across any time, no matter what > the signal says. > > > > The crossing would work exactly the same with and without these strips. > Not if the lights are not running/blinking (as is the case with the specific example outside of rushhours iirc) then the legal semantics are the same as if there are no lights.
> > > > > *From:*Simon Poole <si...@poole.ch> > *Sent:* Saturday, 25 May 2019 20:25 > *To:* tagging@openstreetmap.org > *Subject:* Re: [Tagging] Non-orthogonal crossing=* tag proposals: > crossing=marked/unmarked vs crossing:markings=yes/no > > > > > > Am 25.05.2019 um 02:18 schrieb Paul Allen: > > > > +1 for "mutually exclusive." Except, perhaps, in Poland. I'm > still waiting for an answer on that one. > > > > > > Traffic signal controlled crossings with markings (including stripes > of some colour) exist (not claiming that they are "common") at least > all over central Europe (as pointed out in one of the contributions a > couple of 100 postings back, they will typically control the vehicle > traffic too). Random example > https://www.mapillary.com/app/user/sp8962de?menu=false&focus=photo&lat=47.4040085&lng=8.39442809000002&z=15.17281376123384&signs=true&pKey=zL2pXJc6T_RffQheFsdbYA > > > > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
