On Mon, Aug 01, 2016 at 11:11:37PM +0100, Philip Barnes wrote: > The first problem I see is that mapping sidewalks as a separate way > should not be done unless there is a physical separation. For a > pedestrian the sidewalk is a part of the road. > > Mapping as separate ways can mess up routing for pedestrians who can > cross the road wherever they wish.
This is a point i aswell see - In Germany we have a lot mixed/joined Pedestrian/Cycling sidewalks - Either seperated by color of the pavement or even shared space. Now for fixing the cyclist routing we would need a short snippet of way between the sidewalks and the road on every lowered kerb. (Needed for wheelchair too) Like this. https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=51.89695584&lng=8.37890799&z=17&focus=photo&pKey=HNYmY7YSPnmpZnb5glAA7g You have the default crossing on the left - Bicycle and Pedestrian seperated. You have lowered kerbs on the right front which is mapped as a service/driveway but on the left in the distance you see lowered kerbs for the garages. How would this proposal fit into mapping this? > Mapping in the way you propose would leave the problem of where a > mapper would then place sufficient 'imaginary' crossings to not break > pedestrian routing Thats the point. I am missing more complex mapping examples than the single, simple crossing. Flo -- Florian Lohoff f...@zz.de UTF-8 Test: The 🐈 ran after a 🐁, but the 🐁 ran away
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
