On Mon, 25 Nov 2019 at 10:15, Markus wrote:
> On Sun, 24 Nov 2019 at 23:19, Paul Allen wrote:
> The examples in my previous message are from 30 km/h zones in
> Switzerland, where there are no marked or signalised pedestrian
> crossings except near schools or homes for senior or handicapped
>
On Sun, 24 Nov 2019 at 23:19, Paul Allen wrote:
>
> Depends on jurisdiction too (if I'm following all this correctly, which I may
> not be). In
> some jurisdictions, crossing is legal only at specified crossings and they
> tend to
> be frequent. In other jurisdictions, like the UK, crossing
On Sun, 24 Nov 2019 at 21:52, Markus wrote:
>
> This is true, but mapping sidewalks with separate ways isn't
> unproblematical either, especially if there aren't any marked
> crosswalks: mapping unmarked crossings is often impossible because not
> verifiable, but not mapping crossings results in
On Sat, 23 Nov 2019 at 01:03, Nick Bolten wrote:
>
> These errors are an artifact of not knowing where the sidewalks and crossings
> actually interface and having to guess about them.
It should be possible to solve this problem by specifying the width of
the carriageway (width=*) and of the
> The following pedestrian router already seems to work quite well with
sidewalk=* tags and highway=crossing nodes (examples):
When something "works" 99.9% of the time, it's the edge cases that matter.
But, because this is a network problem, a single edge case can disrupt tons
of paths.
Here's
On Mon, 18 Nov 2019 at 02:48, John Willis via Tagging
wrote:
>
> I use “unmarked crossing” for all connections of sidewalks where they
> dead-end and have to be connected into the road.
If there's a second sidewalk or a pedestrian lane on the opposite side
of the road, this may make sense. But
I use “unmarked crossing” for all connections of sidewalks where they dead-end
and have to be connected into the road.
could be useful there too. there is is no “sideway_link” or similar “footway
routing link” to use, so unmarked crossing works really well, espcially
considering it is where
On Sun, 17 Nov 2019 at 17:32, Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
>
> Generally, if this was agreed, wouldn’t we have to split every footway that
> connects to a road for its last 2 or so meters, because that’s actually the
> road (in a model that takes the extension of the ways into account)?
That's a
sent from a phone
> On 16. Nov 2019, at 11:25, Markus wrote:
>
> I use highway=footway + footway=link connect steps and sidewalks to a
> road, in order to retain the real length and geometry of the steps or
> sidewalks and to indicate that these aren't steps or a sidewalk
> anymore, but part
On Tue, 12 Nov 2019 at 23:54, Nick Bolten wrote:
>
> > You mean a situation like this?:
>
> > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Sidewalk_and_crossing.svg
>
> One very similar to that, yes! I think I normally wouldn't add sidewalk=both
> to any length of the highway=residential. Is that a
Il giorno mar 12 nov 2019 alle ore 23:54 Nick Bolten ha
scritto:
> You make a very good point! A road can have a pedestrian lane, shoulder,
> both, or neither, so it wouldn't make any sense for a pedestrian lane to be
> a type of shoulder. The widths do vary quite a bit as well, regionally.
>
>
You make a very good point! A road can have a pedestrian lane, shoulder,
both, or neither, so it wouldn't make any sense for a pedestrian lane to be
a type of shoulder. The widths do vary quite a bit as well, regionally.
> You mean a situation like this?:
>
sent from a phone
> On 11. Nov 2019, at 23:02, Markus wrote:
>
> Another difference is the width: in Switzerland, pedestrian lanes are
> about 1.5 m wide and shoulders about 4.5 m. But in my opinion their
> different purpose is reason enough to use different tags.
+1, these are lanes, they
Hi Nick,
Please excuse my late reply. :(
On Wed, 6 Nov 2019 at 00:53, Nick Bolten wrote:
>
> ## Similarities to shoulders and an opportunity to figure out how to tag them.
>
> Would it be fair to say that the only differences between this feature and a
> shoulder are (A) it has paint
At the risk of going down a rabbit hole, I'm going to suggest some ways to
think about this that will hopefully spark some discussion related how this
tag could be used with pedestrian navigation.
## Similarities to shoulders and an opportunity to figure out how to tag
them.
Would it be fair to
sent from a phone
> Il giorno 3 nov 2019, alle ore 09:59, Jan Michel ha
> scritto:
>
> This depends on legislature. In Germany, on normal streets (not on motorways)
> the shoulder is not only for emergency use and pedestrians, but also for all
> slower vehicles. These should drive there to
On Sat, 2 Nov 2019 at 20:37, Clifford Snow wrote:
>
> I like your proposal but think it needs to clarify the difference between a
> pedestrian lane and a shoulder [1]. In the US, most (many?) states allow
> pedestrians to walk on shoulders if there is no sidewalk/footway, with the
> exception
On 03.11.19 08:19, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
Il giorno 2 nov 2019, alle ore 20:37, Clifford Snow
ha scritto:
I like your proposal but think it needs to clarify the difference between a
pedestrian lane and a shoulder [1]. In the US, most (many?) states allow
pedestrians to walk on shoulders
The only pedestrian lane that I know, in my German hometown, is separated from
the rest of the road by a solid line. So it's not legal for vehicles to drive
on it.
Michael
Am So., Nov. 3, 2019 at 8:20 schrieb Martin
Koppenhoefer:
sent from a phone
> Il giorno 2 nov 2019, alle ore
sent from a phone
> Il giorno 2 nov 2019, alle ore 20:37, Clifford Snow
> ha scritto:
>
> I like your proposal but think it needs to clarify the difference between a
> pedestrian lane and a shoulder [1]. In the US, most (many?) states allow
> pedestrians to walk on shoulders if there is no
Hi Clifford,
On 02/11/19 20:35, Clifford Snow wrote:
Markus,
I like your proposal but think it needs to clarify the difference
between a pedestrian lane and a shoulder [1]. In the US, most (many?)
states allow pedestrians to walk on shoulders if there is no
sidewalk/footway, with the
Markus,
I like your proposal but think it needs to clarify the difference between a
pedestrian lane and a shoulder [1]. In the US, most (many?) states allow
pedestrians to walk on shoulders if there is no sidewalk/footway, with the
exception of motorways. How would a mapper know if this is a
On Fri, 1 Nov 2019 at 22:54, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
>
> currently your proposal is a description of the physical appearance of the
> feature, but for highways what is needed are usually functional and legal
> definitions. A cycleway is a way designated for bicycles, a motorway excludes
>
currently your proposal is a description of the physical appearance of the
feature, but for highways what is needed are usually functional and legal
definitions. A cycleway is a way designated for bicycles, a motorway excludes
slow traffic, and so on.
To make sense of a pedestrian lane it
24 matches
Mail list logo
