|
Would it be: highway=crossing crossing=uncontrolled crossing_ref=zebra OR highway=crossing crossing=zebra I am asking because the second tag set is a preset in ID, however, there is no wiki documentation on the tag crossing=zebra. I think that by using crossing=zebra you don't need to use the tag crossing=uncontrolled because by definition a zebra crossing is: for pedestrians only and it has no traffic lights. Applying the similar logic of the tag crossing=unmarked (this tag doesn't use crossing=uncontrolled since it is assumed by definition). I would lean to use the second tag set for the following reasons: it is more concise with fewer tags, it is a preset on iD Editor with its own distinct symbology, and crossing=zebra is already in widespread use. On taginfo crossing=zebra has a count of: 473,653 crossing_ref=zebra has a count of: 317,172 Here is the OSM crossing wiki for your reference: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:crossing Regards, |
|
I would use the second one. More simple as you say, and I see it is already in the wiki anyway. Be aware that if there are traffic lights too, you should use crossing=traffic_lights instead. This is very common for example in Spain (and confusing!). The first option would be valid too. |
|
Unlike edvac, I would rather go for the first one or even drop the crossing_ref. In Belgium all pedestrian crossings are zebra's. But some of the are controlled by traffic lights, some have an island in the middle and some are uncrontrolled. That is why we use the crossing-tag as explained on this wiki page. Crossing_ref is concidered as a British classification of pedestrian crossings, where the type of line is different depending on the type of crossing (traffic lights, island, uncontrolled, ...) So for Belgium (and I think other countries as well), the iD preset is useless. 1
I agree that using crossing=zebra or crossing_ref=zebra only makes sense in places where these are actually a separate class of crossing. In countries that happen to use the zebra pattern for all uncontrolled and/or controlled crossings, you would just use regular crossing=uncontrolled or crossing=traffic_signals tags. The question still makes sense for jurisdictions that make a distinction, though. Germany has both regular uncontrolled crossings and zebra-style uncontrolled crossings, for example, with different legal meanings.
(03 Oct '18, 09:39)
Tordanik
|
|
I think the answer may depend where you are situated. The crossing_ref=zebra has a very specific meaning in the United Kingdom. Many crossings with black and white painted lines in the UK are not formally zebra crossings (for instance in car parks, private sites such as hospitals & universities). A proper zebra crossing not only has black & white stripes, but has specific road markings (and restrictions) either side of the crossing and must also have a flashing orange light: the Belisha beacon. Whether crossing=marked or crossing=uncontrolled is used is still an open point, but when there are multiple ways of marking a crossing which is not signal controlled an additional tag is still needed. Where all such crossings have stripes the two tags are probably synonyms. |
|
Nowadays, when you tag a marked crossing in iD it adds these tags: I consider this the most "official" way to tag a zebra crossing. 1
Why do you consider it the most "offical" way? Just because iD adds it? Remember that iD is just one editor out of many. Also, iD not using crossing=zebra is rather controversial, see https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/issues/6962.
(12 Mar, 08:55)
scai ♦
|
