> and we already have it : crossing_ref I was only referencing these facts to note a synergy with another proposal. It won't be productive to hash out the entirety of problems with crossing=uncontrolled and the proposal to use crossing=marked in this thread, so I'll ask that we have in-depth discussion on the other thread instead.
> beware of caricature : > - unmarked pedestrian crossings with lowered kerb for wheelchairs > - unmarked pedestrian crossing that connects a sidewalk on each side of the crossing > just because you've never seen one before doesn't mean it's a fiction. I'm going to ask, again, that you keep away from personal accusations, particularly ones that are speculative in nature. I have mapped thousands of unmarked crossings and am in no way implying anything derogatory. It is simply a fact that there are very few visual indications of where a pedestrian will cross an unmarked crossing. Therefore, the location where it is drawn is somewhat arbitrary - if you're lucky, there's a dropped curb and you can draw the line through those drops, but this is not necessary. On Wed, May 8, 2019 at 2:10 AM marc marc <marc_marc_...@hotmail.com> wrote: > Le 08.05.19 à 00:06, Tobias Knerr a écrit : > > We need a tag for the_type_ of the markings anyway > > (as different patterns for marked crossings can have > > entirely different legal meanings in some jurisdictions), and we can use > > that same tag for presence/absence by also allowing yes/no values. > > and we already have it : crossing_ref > and indeed i agree that adding yes/no to current value is a good idea. > the name of the key is not perfect, but it has the advantage of > existing. changing all the keys and value at once seems unrealistic. it > seems preferable to me to take out the type of marking of the crossing > key in favour of the crossing_ref key, it is not a perfect change, but > it was already a huge step forward. we discussed it on the talk-fr list > last year, no one opposed the mecanical edit. on the contrary only one > contributor would have wanted us to go further and change all at once. > to big to success. > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
