crossing=marked as a new preset and/or a validator test

[taylor.smock]

​https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/crossing%3Dmarked#Tagging is where the proposal currently lives.

That said, iD is now using it (since ​https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/commit/1ffca3ce85d630539c7ebb11454a91770bd76536), and since iD is the default editor, that means that we will start seeing more crossing=marked in OpenStreetMap.

We can add a test to the validator

node[highway=crossing][crossing=zebra][!inside("GB")],
node[highway=crossing][crossing=unmarked][crossing_ref=zebra][!inside("GB")] {
  throwWarning: tr("{0} should be crossing=marked", "{1}");
  fixAdd: "crossing=marked";
}

node[highway=crossing][crossing=zebra][inside("GB")],
node[highway=crossing][crossing=unmarked][crossing_ref=zebra][inside("GB")] {
  throwWarning: tr("{0} should be crossing=marked", "{1}");
  fixAdd: "crossing=marked";
  fixAdd: "crossing_ref=zebra";
}

node[highway=crossing][crossing=traffic_signals] {
  throwWarning: tr("{0} should be traffic_signals=yes, crossing=(marked/unmarked)");
  fixAdd: "traffic_signals=yes";
}

[skyper]

One more decision by developers of a single editor without prior discussion and without proposal at that moment, at least, influencing the meaning of established tags and not solving anything but adding more confusion. Thanks.

I'd prefer an accepted proposal for deprecating.
Why is crossing_ref=zebra removed outside GB. The tag is still valid and information is lost without it.
Why is traffic_signal included? The current tagging crossing=traffic_signal, crossing_ref=zebra works perfectly.

[taylor.smock]

Replying to skyper:

One more decision by developers of a single editor without prior discussion and without proposal at that moment, at least, influencing the meaning of established tags and not solving anything but adding more confusion. Thanks.

I'd prefer an accepted proposal for deprecating.
Why is crossing_ref=zebra removed outside GB. The tag is still valid and information is lost without it.
Why is traffic_signal included? The current tagging crossing=traffic_signal, crossing_ref=zebra works perfectly.

TBH, given that its been three years (2018-06 for the proposal), I'm more inclined to close this as wontfix. If the proposal ever gets voted on, we can revisit that decision.

[kempelen]

Taginfo 04/2022:
crossing=marked is now the most tagged with ~2M occurrences, second is crossing=uncontrolled ~1.2M, third crossing=unmarked 1.1M
(JOSM does not know "marked", so I didn't know it either.)

[aceman]

Yes, and people with iD still mass add it or even needlessly convert correct 'uncontrolled' to 'marked'. crossing=marked already has its wiki page, but it is still unclear why it is needed.
It's unclear if JOSM should support it in any way.

See also ​https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:crossing:markings which does not solve this problem, but adds some new take on the 'crossing_ref' usage.

[GerdP]

Hm, I've never used crossing=marked so far but it seems indeed more intuitive than crossing=uncontrolled. I always wondered who would be controlling a crossing. Maybe a police officer working there regularly? Probably a translation problem on my side ;)

[taylor.smock]

I do agree that crossing=marked seems to be more intuitive. My only problem is that the proposal got abandoned after iD started supporting it, and iD at one point in time was encouraging users to change crossing=zebra to crossing=marked. That was controversial.

I really don't want to get involved in a tagging conflict. With that said, at this point crossing=marked is a de facto tag due to the usage in iD.

@GerdP: If it helps, in the US crossing=uncontrolled is typically used at intersections where there are markings but no traffic signals. In other words, pedestrians can choose to cross whenever and oncoming traffic (usually) has to yield to the pedestrian. At a controlled intersection, there is usually a traffic signal telling pedestrians when to cross, although pedestrians often ignore it when there is no oncoming traffic.

[taylor.smock]

The primary driver of crossing=marked (iD) will not be adding crossing=marked in future releases. It will instead be using a crossing:markings to indicate whether or not the crossing is marked.

See ​https://github.com/openstreetmap/id-tagging-schema/pull/590 . I don't know when that will make it into a released version of iD though.