I think we can at least add an image tag as a raw data for someone
such as wheelchair users or mapillary that may estimate the height
automatically in the future :)
lowered:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4294717996
raised:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4293918233
Shu Higashi
2018-01-08
> Maybe there's a good middle ground: a kerb height ranking, in lieu of taking
> out a ruler and/or guessing a true kerb:height value.
> kerb:height=low/medium/high, with corresponding ranges in cm (0-3, 3-10, 10+).
That's actually very similar to mountable/semi-mountable/non-mountable
or wheelc
> Even if only three out of four wheelchair users were satisfied with
`mountable`, `semi-mountable` and `non-mountable` this would be a step
forward, in my opinion.
I would wager that the fraction of wheelchair users covered would be a
minority - there's a lot of diversity that tends to get lumped
I'd say the first picture is a flush kerb followed by a ramp.
On 7 January 2018 at 20:12, Selfish Seahorse
wrote:
> Not, it's not ideal, you are right. It's just an idea to create some
> order, because the current kerb scheme isn't ideal either. Even if
> only three out of four wheelchair users
Not, it's not ideal, you are right. It's just an idea to create some
order, because the current kerb scheme isn't ideal either. Even if
only three out of four wheelchair users were satisfied with
`mountable`, `semi-mountable` and `non-mountable` this would be a step
forward, in my opinion. Besides,
I like the idea of explicitly indicating the presence of a ramp, as they're
specialized infrastructure that isn't exactly the same as just having a
sloped curb interface. Though I would argue that it makes sense for them to
be a linear feature separate from the `kerb` key, as they have non-trivial
If the road and sidewalk have no curb interface, then `kerb=flush` seems
appropriate.
On Sun, Dec 31, 2017 at 1:15 PM Matej Lieskovský
wrote:
> How does this work with roads raised to the level of the sidewalk?
>
> On 31 Dec 2017 19:43, "Selfish Seahorse"
> wrote:
>
> On 29 December 2017 at 00:
> * `mountable`: mountable for wheelchairs and vehicles (...)
While this may seem easier to tag on a first pass, it's not ideal, as it's
making a broad-brush executive decision about accessibility on behalf of
others. I'm also not sure how it's different from wheelchair=yes/no
combined with access
On 29 December 2017 at 01:41, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> kerb:shape=* would be better as it suggests what is to be tagged.
Thus, `kerb=*` values could be replaced with:
* `mountable`: mountable for wheelchairs and vehicles
* `semi-mountable`: not mountable for wheelchairs but mountabl
If I understand you right, that would be a case for `kerb=flush`, where the
interface between the road and footways has no significant vertical
displacement.
On Sun, Dec 31, 2017, 1:15 PM Matej Lieskovský
wrote:
> How does this work with roads raised to the level of the sidewalk?
>
> On 31 Dec 2
How does this work with roads raised to the level of the sidewalk?
On 31 Dec 2017 19:43, "Selfish Seahorse" wrote:
On 29 December 2017 at 00:32, Nick Bolten wrote:
> That's a really great example of how it may make sense to separate out the
> idea of a 'curb ramp' from the curb interface. I mig
On 29 December 2017 at 00:32, Nick Bolten wrote:
> That's a really great example of how it may make sense to separate out the
> idea of a 'curb ramp' from the curb interface. I might have to steal it!
Maybe `kerb=ramp`, leaving `kerb=lowered` for kerbs of low height?
@Warin: Thanks for the links
a 2mm kerb (the last picture) is imho a lowered.
I don't see what value added would bring the fact that the angle of
these 2mm is square. for me it is necessary to remember the purpose of
the tag: accessibility. if all profiles pass this kerb without a
problem, it's lowered.
the problem is for
There are many different kerb shapes
http://www.playford.sa.gov.au/webdata/resources/files/SD%20100%20TYPICAL%20RESIDENTIAL%20KERB%20PROFILES.pdf
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curb#Types_of_curb
kerb:shape=* would be better as it suggests what is to be tagged*. *
kerb=* is open to any use, kerb=
That's a really great example of how it may make sense to separate out the
idea of a 'curb ramp' from the curb interface. I might have to steal it!
On Thu, Dec 28, 2017 at 3:12 PM Selfish Seahorse
wrote:
> On 28 December 2017 at 23:50, Nick Bolten wrote:
> > With that said, I agree that there a
On 28 December 2017 at 23:50, Nick Bolten wrote:
> With that said, I agree that there are opportunities for improving `kerb`
> tags. Here are some ideas to toss around:
>
> - `kerb=square` would seem to be as descriptive as `kerb=raised`, but more
> clear.
>
> - `barrier=kerb` is sometimes used in
> The question is: does it make sense to introduce another `kerb` value in
order to differentiate between standard high kerbs and very high kerbs at
public transport stops?
If I understand the question right, it really comes down to what you
consider to be a curb. Some transit stops have raised pl
I agree that `kerb:height` is more useful than `kerb`. However, `kerb`
seems to be a good starting point when mapping many kerbs and you
can't measure them all yet, as it gives a rough information whether
most wheelchair users can cross the street there or not.
The question is: does it make sense
I'd use "normal" or "regular", leaving "raised" for "above the norm". Both
values are quite rare, but I guess that is because most will simply not tag
it. Or (as the wiki discussion suggests) use kerb:height in cm.
Looks like that wiki page could use updating...
Matej Lieskovský
On 28 December 2
This kind of info is actually very relevant to all kinds of different
pedestrians. There are manual wheelchair users with serious athleticism who
are happy with moderate curbs, but can't do tall ones (due to physics -
they'd tip before getting over), people with limited mobility who use
walkers/can
On 28 December 2017 at 20:29, Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
> I think it makes a difference to many wheelchair users or cyclists or
> automobilists or most other vehicles and pedestrians whether the kerb is 12
> or 30 centimeters (assuming that meters was a typo, right?).
>
> Regarding the tag rai
On 29 December 2017 at 05:05, Selfish Seahorse
wrote:
it doesn't make a difference for wheelchair users if the kerb is 12 or
> 30 metres high.
>
I think it would make a difference to everybody if the kerb is 30 metres
high! :-)
Thanks
Graeme
___
Tagg
sent from a phone
> On 28. Dec 2017, at 20:05, Selfish Seahorse wrote:
>
> I think it makes sense to tag common high kerbs `kerb=raised` too, as
> it doesn't make a difference for wheelchair users if the kerb is 12 or
> 30 metres high.
>
> What is your opinion?
I think it makes a difference
kerb=raised is a bit subjective, but you can always add kerb:height when in
doubt. Another way to look at it is as the shape at the interface: flush =
straight on, lowered = approaching linearly at an angle, rolled = rounded,
raised = square edge.
On Thu, Dec 28, 2017, 12:15 PM Selfish Seahorse
w
24 matches
Mail list logo
