It is the same story again and again. -First was the node and ways. And some classification . It was not enough -Second arrived relations. but when you want to specify more..it is not enough -Then it was other tags like classification, lanes, sidewalks... it is not enough if you want to make all the details. -Then arrived the area mapping to make it more realistic. But only for some items as sidewalks. Congrats , now we need the detail of a kerb drawed as an area.
I think best way at first is using the same tagging we have for kerb https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:kerb https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=kerb#keys Then...you know you will need more tags...cuz it is not enough ;) PD: don't map for the render (instead it would be OSM official's one). All real info is welcomed Salut i mapes yopaseopor On Sun, Mar 3, 2019 at 8:13 PM Nick Bolten <nbol...@gmail.com> wrote: > A recent post on the Mapillary blog ( > https://blog.mapillary.com/update/2019/02/12/potential-for-openstreetmap-to-seize-the-curb.html) > reminded me of my long-running wish to have more curb lines mapped, so I > wanted to get a discussion started to see what people think of mapping > curbs as ways. > > The short version is this: if we put kerb=* on a line and call it its own > feature, what's the best tagging schema to use and what kind of additional > information is appropriate? Personally, I'd like to use (and recommend) the > existing kerb=* tags around blocks and potentially add parking information. > > Potential mapping and data use cases: > > - Public parking data: curbs are already marked with parking / stopping > information, and when motor vehicles stop at a curb they are meant to > follow the local regulations regarding access. Curbs seem like a natural > place to store this information: you can split the way whenever the parking > situation differs or where there are dedicated parking slots. It is > attractive to associate streets with parking information, but if one were > to split street ways whenever parking information changed, every city block > would become an incomprehensible, split-up mess. > > - Streets as areas: there are a few schemas out there about mapping > streets and related features as areas, primarily for rendering purposes. > Mapping the curb is fully compatible with, and part of, these proposals, > and could provide a means of building up to fully mapping contiguous areas. > > - Pedestrian crossings. I would be very excited to map out kerb=* ways > around every block I see, because it makes QA (and even safe, > semi-automated edits) for pedestrian accessibility so easy. All a validator > has to do is check that a highway=footway crosses a kerb=* way and lacks > its own kerb=* node. This is similar to the validators already used in JOSM > and iD that check for things like a footway or street intersecting a > building, reminding users to use covered=* or tunnel=*. > > - Pedestrian islands. These are often just an assembly of raised curbs > intended to protect pedestrians that are doing a multi-part crossing of a > street or streets. > > - Opportunity to merge with + simplify micromapped stairs: what are stairs > but a series of carefully-raised "curbs"? I've seen various proposals > regarding how one might map large, beautiful, public stairways. This is a > whole can of worms, but the information in describing a physical curb is > essentially the same as describing any 'stuff on the right is higher than > stuff on the left' interface. > > Thoughts? > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
