The same user whose edits gave rise to the post below appears to have
decided to "standardise" crossing tagging on crossings in Newham, most
of which I have surveyed and mapped, with the following innovations:
1) tactile_paving=yes on crossing ways, although none of the ways have
tactile paving along their entire length. This may be a result of
copying all the tags from the crossing node to the way, but could be
unhelpful for any data consumers which expect tactile_paving=* to work
as documented.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:tactile_paving#Use_on_ways
2) removing crossing=no from highway=traffic_signals nodes where there
is either no crossing or a crossing which is mapped as a separate node.
It's not a necessary tag, but it's been used as documented in the 'How
to map' section of the wiki. I've added a sentence to the wiki for
crossing=no referring to highway=traffic_signals
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dtraffic_signals#How_to_map_(new)
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Key:crossing&diff=prev&oldid=2421754
3) replacing traffic_signals=traffic_lights with the less-specific
traffic_signals=signal and traffic_signals=pedestrian_crossing with the
undocumented traffic_signals=crossing
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:traffic_signals
I'm happy for my edits to be corrected when I make mistakes or misread
the wiki, which I'm sure happens more often than I imagine. However,
it's rather annoying to lose data to what appears to be an undiscussed
and potentially misguided personal project.
On 27/09/2022 07:42, Robert Skedgell wrote:
Where there is a crossing with traffic islands, but the highways forming
the crossings and crossing the islands are mapped separately, my
assumption has been that crossing:island=no is the correct tagging.
If a visually impaired user is being told to expect additional islands
or refuges where none exist, this does not strike me as particularly safe.
This wiki appears to agree with this:
"Do not tag a crossing with crossing:island=yes if the crossing is
explicitly mapped as multiple separate crossings; i.e., where the
traffic island is not part of the footway=crossing way. This is common
with larger intersections with wide traffic islands where the traffic
lane in each direction is mapped separately. For clarity, the stretches
of highway=footway that form part of the traffic island can be tagged
with footway=traffic_island. Additionally, the footway=crossing sections
can optionally be tagged with crossing:island=no. This may be useful in
case you are performing a survey of all crossings in an area and wish to
explicitly mark these as having separate (or no) refuge islands."
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:crossing:island
I haven't used footway|cycleway=traffic_island on the ways crossing the
islands, possibly because JOSM and/or Osmose (incorrectly?) complain.
Perhaps I should?
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
