On 18.12.2022 23:11, Brian M. Sperlongano wrote:
Currently taking bets on how long it will take before someone actually
answers the question I posedÂ đŸ˜‚
Seems to me, in the situation described, and with the tagging instances
in Texas I could find, the tagging is accurate, in that it shows:
1. you're not allowed to walk on the carriageway (the way in question)
2. there is a sidewalk
3. the sidewalk is tagged separately
4. the sidewalk way does not have foot=no
So walking on this way is not allowed, but there is another way that you
can walk on, and it's really close and should follow approximately the
same geometry. It seems to me you can include this in your dataset.
As to the principle of sidewalk-like structures where walking is
genuinely prohibited, I would say tagging that as a sidewalk would be
incorrect. It looks like a duck, but it's probably something else.
There are instances that you wouldn't want to include in your router.
E.g. https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/658000911, which is similar
except there is no sidewalk=separate. Walking on this "sidewalk" is
probably prohibited, because to get to it, you have to pass a sign that
says no walking, except if you manage to cross a gated fence (at the
southern end). The "sidewalk" is probably for some other use, possibly
emergencies, possibly something else, possibly just a waste of space.
I'm not a big fan of this particular tagging because it is misleading
and confusing.
I don't know how you would tell the difference, apart from the lack of
sidewalk=separate on the carriageway.
Jens
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
