Ah, I see. You are talking about cycling on the sidewalk. Indeed, very unusual in Nederland. To me it's strange to tag continuous_sidewalk mainly for cycling.
You talk of junction=continuous_sidewalk, I see no reason to even consider that. If you have a cycleway, footway or footcycleway around a roundabout, it still has crossings with the roads.which can and often will differ, so IMO the crossing nodes would carry the attributes. Well, I have given my thoughts, good luck with the proposal! Best, Peter Elderson Op za 25 jan. 2020 om 17:28 schreef Florimond Berthoux < florimond.berth...@gmail.com>: > > > Le sam. 25 janv. 2020 à 15:19, Peter Elderson <pelder...@gmail.com> a > écrit : > >> Florimond Berthoux <florimond.berth...@gmail.com>: >> >>> With a table the pedestrians have to cross the road, it is the opposite >>> for the continuous sidewalk that's why I'm in favor to add a new value >>> >> traffic_calming=continuous_sidewalk >>> >> >> Well, any crossing involves different ways crossing each other, and >> should be considered from all angles involved. A way can't cross another >> way without being crossed itself. >> > > Crossing key is defined as such «This tag is used for more accurately > describing specific types of pedestrian crossings across roads» > Continuous sidewalk is a sidewalk, so pedestrian don't cross a road but a > sidewalk, so crossing key cannot be applied. > > >> Give ways: >>> If there is traffic sign or painting you can add a give way tag. >>> If there is none, you cannot add a give way, or you would interpret the >>> law which is not on the ground. >>> >>> Crossing: >>> I thought of using crossing key but there are issues: >>> - the tag is only for pedestrians crossing the road, where as a >>> continuous sidewalk is a sidewalk cross by cars (though we could change the >>> definition of crossing to embrace more situations) >>> >> >> I would not even consider that a change: as said above, a way can't >> cross another way without being crossed by the other way. >> >> >>> - continuous cycleways exist too (and it’s the main reason I’d like to >>> tag them) >>> >> >> In Nederland, cycleways tend to be continuous by design, but that does >> not imply anything. All the regular traffic rules apply. Only continuous >> pedestrian surface (including elevation, pavement, lining) is significant. >> It is in effect a pedestrian area or living street, where other traffic is >> tolerated but has no rights. Also, traffic coming from an area like that >> has no priority whatsoever. Movements of vehicles on the pavement are >> considered "special manoeuvres" and the driver has to give way to all >> others. >> > > Yes in Netherland you don't know what crossing a kurb every 50m on bicycle > means, but there is a difference of having the cycleway going down to join > the level of the road and crossing it than having the cycleway staying > higher than the road on a cycleway. > not continuous : > https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=52.10055&lng=5.086457999999993&z=18.24231017301564&pKey=ZoLEx4v54zKtpXwEAiT_nw&focus=photo > 5m further continuous : > https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=52.100289999999944&lng=5.086368999999991&z=18.24231017301564&pKey=_hSpfQK3eiU4HbKEEFePIw&focus=photo > > - it collides with continuous sidewalk, you may have continuous sidewalk >>> and a crossing, it’s not a normal case but I have at least one example in >>> Paris where zebras were added on a continuous sidewalk, hence the need for >>> another tag. >>> >> >> This would just be extra lining to emphasize priority for pedestrians. It >> looks like a zebra but It would still be a "continuous_sidewalk" crossing. >> Calling it a zebra crossing while it is continuous sidewalk would send the >> wrong message. >> > > No, I want to tag both features, I not here to interpret the world, the > law or else, I just want to say there is a continuous sidewalk with zebra > on it. > > >> For the moment my concern is about would it be possible to have tag >>> collision with junction. >>> And I just realize that a cycleway can be a junction=roundabout, and >>> being continuous at the intersection with roads in and out of the >>> roundabout. >>> >> >> That is very common around here for cycleways around a roundabout, but it >> doesn't mean anything unless traffic signs (stop signs, give_way signs or >> shark's teeth) are present. Pedestrian roundabouts, .i.e. continous sidwalk >> around a roundabout, I have never seen that, but if present, it would imply >> absolute priority for pedestrians and nothing for cyclists! >> >> >>> So I guess we have to create a key. >>> >>> >> I don't see how that follows from your arguments! >> A node on the way where it crosses the middle line of the continuous >> pavement (whether drawn as a way or not) tagged with either >> traffic_calming=continous_sidewalk or crossing=continuous_sidewalk) covers >> all cases mentioned, I think. Just an extra value. >> >> I think that would be enough for basic rendering, routing and >> traffic-oriented maps. >> > > You'll not be able to tag a roundabout on the ways of a cycleway > (junction=roundabout) and tag on the way of the continuous cycleway > (junction=continuous_sidewalk) since it already have junction=roundabout, > two feature on the same tag -> collision. > > -- > Florimond Berthoux > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
