I marked this along with other mails to reply to and somehow missed it so
apologies for the late reply
I took a quick look in taginfo [1] (we also have a version for Ireland
incase people didn't know [2]) and in the wiki and the most used option is
traffic_calming=island (14k)
There is also landuse=traffic_island (2k uses). While neither way is wrong
per se, the traffic_calming one fits within the traffic_calming schema so
is probably the better option
There's some sparse detail on the wiki about it here [3] and here [4]
In terms of access, if there is a barrier running down the middle, map the
barrier as such e.g. barrier=fence etc
With regards to routing, you can test that out on the OSM site. I used your
O Connell Street example [5].
Something such as the meridian in OC Street, I'm not sure that would be
considered a traffic island?
1 - http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/
2 - http://taginfo.openstreetmap.ie/
3 - http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:traffic_calming - Bottom of page
4 - http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:traffic_calming%3Disland
5 -
http://www.openstreetmap.org/directions?engine=mapzen_foot&route=53.3474%2C-6.2595%3B53.3524%2C-6.2613#map=16/53.3499/-6.2603
Hope this helps
Dave
On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 3:04 PM, Conor wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Colm and myself raised an issue relating to pedestrianised areas and
> footways a month ago and there was no response at the time. This
> issues are ongoing and I'm wondering if anyone has an opinion a month
> later? I'll include Colm's and my own original messages below. Thanks
>
> =
>
> Hi,
> I'm wondering what the best way is to deal with traffic islands - the
> parts of roads that aren't roadway / carriageway and aren't lateral
> footways / footpaths. Sometimes they are unmapped, sometimes they are
> mapped as pedestrian areas and/or pedestrian ways .
> On the road, they generally come in one of three fashions:1. No
> pedestrian access / no meaningful pedestrian use, e.g. Dorset Street
> Lower in Dublin, where there are trees every 10 meters that block the
> way. Not mapped, other than as two separate roadways. Should these be
> mapped at all?
>
> https://www.google.ie/maps/@53.3599777,-6.261141,3a,75y,44.35h,85.42t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s0YTaJATDMDakjhiLjRa__w!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo2.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3D0YTaJATDMDakjhiLjRa__w%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D219.34166%26pitch%3D0!7i13312!8i6656
> 2. Those where pedestrian access is an important part of their use,
> e.g. at the central median on O'Connell Bridge in Dublin. Mapped as
> pedestrian area linked to pedestrian ways at the south end, but not
> the north end, effectively making it a cul de sac. I'm not sure how
> route planners treat areas.
>
> https://www.google.ie/maps/@53.3470972,-6.2591266,3a,75y,90t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s7ed2ZerYJnbZnrW-0cHENQ!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo2.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3D7ed2ZerYJnbZnrW-0cHENQ%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D94.366425%26pitch%3D0!7i13312!8i6656
> 3. Traffic islands at signaled junctions generally, e.g. at the
> junction of O'Connell Bridge / D'Olier Street / Westmoreland Street.
> Mapped as pedestrian areas and pedestrian ways.
> Thank you
> Colm
>
> =
>
> Hi Colm,
>
> Perhaps you're the same Colm that I was in touch with on a similar
> subject a few days ago? If so, we had discussed raising this on the
> mailing list so either way this would be as good a time to add some
> further thoughts to the subject if that's ok. Apologies for the long
> read...
>
> The aspects you drew attention here to are really interesting as they
> highlight how differently all contributors to OSM can see the value,
> use and appeal of the map. I myself am more biased towards visual
> reading of maps (yes, that old fashioned way) and sometimes see people
> question the value of mapping something where I see no question at
> all. All valid questions though, of course. In my attempts at
> recommending OSM to various friends and work colleagues for actual map
> usage most try and use it for visual reading of a map (they generally
> find it doesn't work as well as Google for directions), whereas any
> friends who would be more technically inclined often find the routing,
> tools and contributing more appealing.
>
> I've come across a potential clash of solutions for drawing and
> tagging for routing applications vs drawing and tagging for visual
> applications on OSM. As mentioned above, people contributing to the
> map can be attracted to it for varying reasons and I caught a pattern
> occuring in lots of areas I was contributing to. Seeing that all
> applications and uses should be catered for as best as possible,
> myself and VictorIE (the same Colm?) got talking about our difference
> of opinions on the matter.
>
> The issue I raised revolves around the use of short, sporadic footways
> that appear in locations where there isn't a
