Re: [Talk-us] Sidewalks as footpaths
Being an American has nothing to do with a really bad data design. I've been an American 35 years and I think this is really not a good way to model sidewalks. The problem (aside from the issue of data clutter) is that the sidewalk data can't be used for pedestrian routing because the information about the street is not captured. You can't tell someone to follow Main Street, because the path is not labeled as such. In my experience, people trace the sidewalk because it looks pretty in the renderer. What we really want is better rendering of sidewalk tags, not data which can't be used. - Serge On Tue, May 6, 2014 at 9:36 AM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote: As an American, I'd say tracing out the sidewalk is perfectly legitimate, considering jaywalking laws that typically apply in locations with sidewalks, the total non universal nature of sidewalks. On May 1, 2014 11:40 PM, Tod Fitch t...@fitchdesign.com wrote: It is my understanding that in the US the roadway design in a urban/suburban environment includes the sidewalks, possibly a parkway/planting strip, the curbs and the traveled way. From that point of view I'd only consider mapping a walkway as a separate way only if it did not run parallel and close to the road. -Tod On May 1, 2014, at 8:35 PM, John F. Eldredge wrote: Here in Nashville TN, sidewalks in some business districts alternate every few yards between having concrete extend all of the way to the curb, and having planted strips with grass, flowers, and small trees between the sidewalk and the curb. It would be rather tedious to have the tagging have to alternate between sidewalk and footway every few yards. On April 30, 2014 11:19:31 PM CDT, Russ Nelson nel...@crynwr.com wrote: Kai Krueger writes: But in the US (at least in suburbia), the sidewalks are often much more detached from the road with wide grass strips between them. They also sometimes aren't entirely parallel to the road. Indeed. In Potsdam, NY, we get enough snow that we need those wide grass strips to plow the snow onto. But they're not practical in some places, so the sidewalk can come close to the road in places. It's still a sidewalk, though, and not a way of its own. There is not a wonderful solution for how do map pedestrian routing when it differs from road-associated routing. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Sidewalks as footpaths
2014-05-08 11:58 GMT+02:00 Serge Wroclawski emac...@gmail.com: Being an American has nothing to do with a really bad data design. I've been an American 35 years and I think this is really not a good way to model sidewalks. +1, agree, my main concern is that as pedestrian you can actually cross a road at any point if it is not too much traffic and there are no other rules forbidding it. Generally with explicity footways routing gets worse in my experience because there mostly only few connections from the sidewalk to the road mapped. There is no way to distinguish separate footways (e.g. separated by a guard rail) from those separated only by a curb. If mapping explicit sidewalks there should also be some entity that ties all road lanes (and sidewalks) together to one object. On the pro side you can add surface, width and other information to where they apply, while with tags on the main centre highway way you would have to split the whole road for every change on the sidewalk (or any other of its lanes). The problem (aside from the issue of data clutter) is that the sidewalk data can't be used for pedestrian routing because the information about the street is not captured. You can't tell someone to follow Main Street, because the path is not labeled as such. well, you should either use a relation to tie them toghether, or add the common attributes like name etc. to all elements (i.e. also to the sidewalk). In the end this is a question of detail, for very detailed mapping there is a benefit IMHO in mapping sidewalks on dedicated objects, but I'd see this more like explicit lane mapping, i.e. better use another tag than highway for this in order to avoid confusion with indipendent footways. cheers, Martin ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Sidewalks as footpaths
On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 7:36 AM, Mike Dupont jamesmikedup...@googlemail.com wrote: On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 4:58 AM, Serge Wroclawski emac...@gmail.com wrote: I've been an American 35 years and I think this is really not a good way to model sidewalks. Ok, serge, well how do you address my issues here in Kansas. How will you model that you have sidewalks of different quality for each property on both sides. I don't know what you mean by quality but if a sidewalk isn't usable as a sidewalk, then don't label it as such, just as I wouldn't be inclined to map a road that's unusable as a usable road. How are we going to model damaged sidewalks as I wrote? Adding in points on the sidewalk way? If you insist on micromapping, then you can use complex objects like relations, but your is a special case, most sidewalks mapped are not micromapped in the same way. In other words, I wouldn't bother to map sidewalks that are not usable. - Serge ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
[Talk-us] Fwd: Sidewalks as footpaths
Bill, You're right that we should map what exists on the ground. I think we need to really consider a few factors here: 1. Why we map sidewalks at all (in either style) 2. What benefits one mapping method has over another 3. The data as it exists now 1. Why map sidewalks This is a judgement call. In NYC it's reasonable to assume that a road has a sidwalk. It would be better to map roads without sidwalks than roads with them, because a vast majority of roads have sidewalks. In DC, where I used to live, many roads did not have sidewalks, or only had sidewalks on one side of the street. Maybe where you are, it's closer to DC, or possibly even less. Or maybe you are trying to bright some light on the state of sidewalks in your area. 2. Benefits of one mapping method over another I think we've beaten this topic to death, not only on this thread, but several times in the past on this and other lists. Benefits of sidewalks as attributes: simplicity (which often wins in OSM). Benefits of mapping them as separate ways: Potentially more data about quality, breaks in the sidewalk, etc. Downsides: Routing engines can't know what sidewalk is associated with what street. Benefits of using relations is that it gets around the routing problem, except that AFAIK no router does that. 3. Usage The biggest issue here is usage. It's not what mappers should do, but What mappers actually do and what mappers actually do is not to create relations. Most sidewalks are either mapped as separate ways, as attributes, or not at all. That's why I'd prefer it to be made as easy as possible for them. Ultimately this is a decision people can make for themselves. I'd rather they map than not map, but certainly people have their own ideas on how people should represent things. - Serge ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Fwd: Sidewalks as footpaths
2014-05-08 16:32 GMT+02:00 Serge Wroclawski emac...@gmail.com: 1. Why map sidewalks This is a judgement call. In NYC it's reasonable to assume that a road has a sidwalk. It would be better to map roads without sidwalks than roads with them, because a vast majority of roads have sidewalks. In DC, where I used to live, many roads did not have sidewalks, or only had sidewalks on one side of the street. Maybe where you are, it's closer to DC, or possibly even less. Or maybe you are trying to bright some light on the state of sidewalks in your area. +1, generally I agree although there are more reasons, especially if you want to record more than just sidewalk=yes/no, e.g. micromapping obstacles. Where I live (not in the US) there are sometimes obstacles on the sidewalk like bollards or there are very narrow spots (down to 30-40cm / 1ft) where you have a hard time passing with a wheelchair or a babystroller. Mapping these all to the main highway (=road) is problematic (you will get complicated and direction dependent tags like footway:right:width) and will require to split the road quite often in order not to apply the tag to road sections where they don't apply to. Also complex crossings can be mapped easier when explicit pedestrian geometry is drawn, especially in situations where you cannot cross all streets but only some. cheers, Martin ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Sidewalks as footpaths
On Thu, 2014-05-08 at 05:58 -0400, Serge Wroclawski wrote: The problem (aside from the issue of data clutter) is that the sidewalk data can't be used for pedestrian routing because the information about the street is not captured. You can't tell someone to follow Main Street, because the path is not labeled as such. Could this problem be alleviated with a tag on the separately mapped footway, e.g. road_name? Or even just addr:street? James ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Sidewalks as footpaths
2014-05-08 17:46 GMT+02:00 James Umbanhowar jumba...@gmail.com: Could this problem be alleviated with a tag on the separately mapped footway, e.g. road_name? Or even just addr:street? why not make it simple and use name? As long as the sidewalk is part of the road this would be correct. cheers, Martin ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Fwd: Sidewalks as footpaths
On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 7:32 AM, Serge Wroclawski emac...@gmail.com wrote: The biggest issue here is usage. It's not what mappers should do, but What mappers actually do and what mappers actually do is not to create relations. Most sidewalks are either mapped as separate ways, as attributes, or not at all. Having moved from a walkable city to a rural city, I can attest to the need to map sidewalks. Just walking to the nearest coffee shop requires walking alongside of a secondary road. It would be nice to discover a route that could be entirely via pedestrian ways. Routing doesn't need names, it just needs connected ways and a means to display the route. I agree that without names, it is difficult to give written directions. But how often do we need written directions any more? Don't most people use some sort of graphical display when looking at routes anymore? Serge is right about relationships. I've been lobbying a local non-profit focused on walkable cities to switch to OSM instead publishing copyrighted pdf maps. I wouldn't relish the thought of teaching them to create a relationship for every sidewalk they entered. I don't even like creating relationships. Slightly off topic but http://www.flaviogortana.com/isoscope/ does a nice job of using OSM data for walking a driving times cities. Clifford -- @osm_seattle osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Fwd: Sidewalks as footpaths
On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 12:59 PM, Clifford Snow cliff...@snowandsnow.us wrote: Routing doesn't need names, it just needs connected ways and a means to display the route. I agree that without names, it is difficult to give written directions. But how often do we need written directions any more? Don't most people use some sort of graphical display when looking at routes anymore? Audio routing (so you can put your phone in your pocket and listen to headphones) and audio/braille descriptions for the disabled would be the most obvious use cases for names. In fact, I'd imagine the disabled are a likely important audience for OSM since Google doesn't go out of its way to provide non-visual interfaces to Google Maps as far as I know. Chris ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Fwd: Sidewalks as footpaths
On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 1:55 PM, Chris Lawrence lordsu...@gmail.com wrote: Audio routing (so you can put your phone in your pocket and listen to headphones) and audio/braille descriptions for the disabled would be the most obvious use cases for names. In fact, I'd imagine the disabled are a likely important audience for OSM since Google doesn't go out of its way to provide non-visual interfaces to Google Maps as far as I know. Good point. Other than using relations, I wonder if a search for the nearest street would provide a clue to the router? Not as exact as having either a named way or a relationship. Clifford -- @osm_seattle osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Fwd: Sidewalks as footpaths
I'm trying to work out how using name=* on the sidewalks isn't the easiest, most obvious answer. On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 6:09 PM, Clifford Snow cliff...@snowandsnow.uswrote: On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 1:55 PM, Chris Lawrence lordsu...@gmail.comwrote: Audio routing (so you can put your phone in your pocket and listen to headphones) and audio/braille descriptions for the disabled would be the most obvious use cases for names. In fact, I'd imagine the disabled are a likely important audience for OSM since Google doesn't go out of its way to provide non-visual interfaces to Google Maps as far as I know. Good point. Other than using relations, I wonder if a search for the nearest street would provide a clue to the router? Not as exact as having either a named way or a relationship. Clifford -- @osm_seattle osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Fwd: Sidewalks as footpaths
Duplication of data, possibly? Regarding the detection of the nearest street, the risk here is at the intersection, where the sidewalk might be attributed to the other street. -- Saikrishna Arcot On Thursday, May 08, 2014 07:02:16 PM Paul Johnson wrote: I'm trying to work out how using name=* on the sidewalks isn't the easiest, most obvious answer. On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 6:09 PM, Clifford Snow cliff...@snowandsnow.us[1] wrote: On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 1:55 PM, Chris Lawrence lordsu...@gmail.com[2] wrote: Audio routing (so you can put your phone in your pocket and listen toheadphones) and audio/braille descriptions for the disabled would bethe most obvious use cases for names. In fact, I'd imagine thedisabled are a likely important audience for OSM since Google doesn'tgo out of its way to provide non-visual interfaces to Google Maps asfar as I know. Good point. Other than using relations, I wonder if a search for the nearest street would provide a clue to the router? Not as exact as having either a named way or a relationship. Clifford -- @osm_seattle osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us[3] OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch Talk-us@openstreetmap.org[4] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us[5] [1] mailto:cliff...@snowandsnow.us [2] mailto:lordsu...@gmail.com [3] http://osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us [4] mailto:Talk-us@openstreetmap.org [5] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Fwd: Sidewalks as footpaths
On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 8:02 PM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote: I'm trying to work out how using name=* on the sidewalks isn't the easiest, most obvious answer. Because there are walking paths with names, and that's not what you're talking about. What you want is essentially a reference to another object, which is why relations are useful- but they're complex to work with. Additionally, using any name reference means that you now need to keep the two objects in sync in non-obvious ways. Let's take an example from NYC. If I had a sidewalk for 6th Avenue, what would the associated street tag name need to be? 6th Avenue Sixth Avenue Avenue of the Americas These tricky edge cases aren't insurmountable, but they add a great deal of complexity to software needing to parse the data in a meaningful way, the end result of which is that more times than not, if the data model is too complex, the programmer simply doesn't bother. That's why I advocate using tags like sidwalk=yes/no/left/right/both directly on the road object. - Serge ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
