> Does any of this change in a jurisdiction where there is an implied > crossing at every intersection unless posted otherwise?
Such purely implied crossings would be crossing=unmarked, and under the "do not map local legislation" rule, I would only map them if they have a physical presence (e.g. lowered kerbs). > What sort of feature gets tagged crossing=no? Does one draw a line > or node to represent the footway that isn't there? It's a tag that should be rarely used, and it's primary purpose is if there is a context in which people may think that there should be crossing here, to indicated that there really isn't one. Mainly to keep armchair mappers from later coming along and thinking "hey, someone forgot to tag the crossing" and add some other crossing=* value. It's important to mention that crossing=no does NOT get a highway=crossing tag, to prevent data consumer that only look for highway=crossing and not interpret the crossing=* value from wrongly thinking there is a crossing here. _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
