3 ms·
The pedestrian should be obvious from the graphic, so just "CROSSING" would be clearer. Most of the world uses a graphic-only sign for this [1, 2] so I'd think
by Symbiote 4y ago
The pedestrian should be obvious from the graphic, so just "CROSSING" would be clearer. Most of the world uses a graphic-only sign for this [1, 2] so I'd think the text is redundant.
(A Google Image search shows examples of "PED XING" alone, but I don't know if this is official or common.)
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Denmark_road_sign_A17.svg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Denmark_road_sign_A17.svg
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Denmark_road_sign_E17.svg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Denmark_road_sign_E17.svg
(Red triangles are warnings, and blue rectangles are information. The blue sign is used at the crossing, and the red one some distance before if if that's necessary -- typically on faster roads.)
- dragonwriter 4y ago> The pedestrian should be obvious from the graphic The text is intentionally fully-redundant with the graphic, when both are used.
- Symbiote 4y agoPersonally I think the text decreases understanding, since it's using a very unusual abbreviation.