Proposal talk:Key:crossing:island

From OpenStreetMap Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search


I use traffic_calming=island for that. This has benefit of being known tag and at least osmand is using it to warn a driver. Maraf (talk) 10:45, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

I'd rather not use traffic_calming=island for pedestrian islands, as they have different purposes and appearances. --SelfishSeahorse (talk) 17:02, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

Alternative to tag islands separately

I like the general idea because the current definition is confusing.

Yet I believe that in the future we should definitely aim at a more accurate design. It is already possible in areas with high-definition aerial imagery. Mapping islands as its own node has several advantages: the nodes with the crossings themselves keep the relevant information (traffic signals or not, has it zebra paintings, etc.) and it will help visually impaired users by telling how many meters to walk before expecting the island.

See my proposal here. Bxl-forever (talk) 11:26, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

Proposal to tag pedestrian islands separately
We will probably want more detailed representations of roads and crossings in the future. But that's a complex topic that's not easy to get right. (For example, your proposal would require roads to be split every time there's a pedestrian island, which contradicts common mapping practice at least in some parts of the world.)
So, in the present, I think we should stay focused on what's a small but effective fix for an everyday tagging problem, i.e. introducing the crossing:island=* key. SelfishSeahorse's proposal isn't changing anything fundamental about the way we map crossings, and while that means it isn't going to revolutionize crossing mapping, it is at least an unambiguous and hopefully uncontroversial improvement over current tagging. It also seems much more likely to be successful in the short term for that reason – and it doesn't prevent us from discussing micro-mapping for crossings down the road. --Tordanik 12:52, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
@Bxl-forever: If there's just a refuge island of < 10 m length (in direction of road traffic) and the road isn't separated into two or more carriageways otherwise, i wouldn't split the road, as this would lead to a strange representation of reality in my opinion (and possibly would also negatively affect routing). As Tordanik already noted, your proposal doesn't work in this case.
Another idea i see is to not tag the footway part on the refuge island (red line in this image) footway=crossing or to tag it footway=island instead. –SelfishSeahorse (talk) 16:42, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

Meaning of crossing=island


While crossing=island would become a bit of a "legacy" tag thanks to the new key, it will likely stick around for some time. The proposal is silent on the interpretation of that old tagging in terms of the new tagging – is that intentional? When I "invented" (if one can call it that) the crossing:island=* key in 2009, I assumed that crossing=island would be treated as equivalent to crossing=uncontrolled + crossing:island=yes, which I still believe best reflects the meaning of that old tag. --Tordanik 13:06, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

Yes, it is intentional. I've noticed that crossing=island has also been used to tag unmarked as well as signalised crossings with refuge islands. And as far as i know crossing=island has never been defined as uncontrolled crossing with refuge island. Thus crossing=island doesn't say more than 'a pedestrian crossing with a refuge island'.
By the way, sorry for stealing your idea! When i've started to tag refuge island and set up the proposal a year ago, i chose crossing:island=* from Taginfo. It was just a few days ago when i noticed your post on that talk page. –SelfishSeahorse (talk) 16:59, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
Good ideas are worth sharing. :) It's high time for this tag to be properly documented, so thank you for writing this down and preparing a vote!
I understand not wanting to retroactively define the island value. Around here, crossings with traffic lights seem to be considered a "higher" category, and would therefore be tagged as traffic_sign even if they also have an island. But given the lack of written rules, it's possible that this might just reflect regional usage. It's hard to tell how people around the world use the old tag, so yeah, it's probably best not to burden your proposal with that issue. --Tordanik 16:18, 5 January 2019 (UTC)