Add support for crossing:markings=*

[kaneap]

OSM Tag(s)

crossing:markings=*

How would you like this tag to see supported?

As a Field

Label

Crosswalk markings

Aliases

No response

Terms

Crossing markings

Link to OSM Wiki page

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:crossing:markings

Status of the Tag

Approved

Usage of the tag

1,472

Replaces other Tag?

No response

Regional Tag?

No response

Further Information

This tag was recently approved.

Pehaps display the implied values in gray (crossing=marked,crossing=traffic_signals (and maybe crossing=uncontrolled) implies crossing:markings=yes)

Also see #408 for the discussion on whether iD should be tagging crossing=uncontrolled instead of crossing=marked, and #507 for the tagging of signalized but unmarked crossings (which would be resolved by adding this field).

Thanks!

[1ec5]

#507 for the tagging of signalized but unmarked crossings (which would be resolved by adding this field).

Yes and no, a crossing:markings field would make it possible to indicate a signalized but unmarked crossing, but perhaps not in the most natural manner. The issue specifically requested a field to indicate signalization, which I think would continue to be useful regardless. I was hoping to more formally propose the already common crossing:signals key at some point, to further deconflict the crossings key. As with the crossing:markings proposal, there’s already some talk about being able to elaborate beyond a Boolean value, to indicate the signalization mechanism. The Crossing With Pedestrian Signals preset would probably need to be renamed or removed at that point, because a crossing controlled by the main traffic signals, without a dedicated pedestrian signal face, could not be described as having “pedestrian signals”, even if crossing=traffic_signals remains literally accurate.