> Here we seem to be in fundamental disagreement. A crossing with traffic signals is a crossing with traffic signals independent of road markings
These proposals are literally to tag these things independently. > the interaction of pedestrians and traffic is determined by the status of the lights. I've given examples for how it isn't actually solely determined by the lights. I'll give them again. - The delineated area of a crossing is often protected: it dictates a place that cars shall not stop. - Interactions go beyond right of way and signals: marking existence, styles and their location relative to signals impact pedestrian safety. Other impacts that are, luckily, already in their own tags: - Audible signals for pedestrians to cross/not cross. - Stop lines. > Yes, it's of interest that in some areas a crossing controlled by lights also has road markings but, unless you can show a case that those markings make it a different type of crossing, they're cosmetic enhancements. I'm confused. I thought we weren't going to go argue about what "controls" things, as that's a legal construct. I think it's good to stop thinking of crossings as types, as this is not a globally-relevant concept. The UK has its variously-named crossings (which now live in crossing_ref if you want to tag that) that tie together right-of-way, controls, markings, APSs, etc, almost all of the rest of the world doesn't. This is, in theory, why OSM deprecated those tags so long ago. Unfortunately, the attempted solution was deeply flawed. > I have yet to see anyone present a case where the presence or absence of road markings at a crossing controlled by traffic signals requires different behaviour by either pedestrians or traffic. These have been offered many times. Though, again, I thought we weren't arguing about controls. > Road markings alone is a more difficult.case because different jurisdictions assign different behaviours to them. But an important characteristic is that there are no traffic lights. Great, so let's map those things in separate tags. > Acid test: explain to a child how to cross the road. It is going to be along the lines of "At this type of crossing you wait for the green signal (or whatever) before you cross." and "At this type of crossing there are no lights, you behave in this (country-specific) way." The use of signaled crossings also varies by regional statute. Visitors to the UK are often confused about how to use all of the crossings, including pelican crossings. There are, for example, pelican crossings that make the little green person blink as a warning to not enter the intersection. This is not how it works in other countries. For example, in my area, a similar warning is a flashing, "do not walk" message. > Does the presence or absence of those road markings fundamentally change the interaction between pedestrian and traffic? Arguing the semantics of fundamentally is going to be even worse than "controlled", but I've given examples of how it impacts it many times. > > >
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
