a-b-street / a-b-street/speedwalk
Handle informal sidepath
- Lingua principale
- Svelte
- Stelle
- 24
- Fork
- 5
- Metriche di merge delle PR
- Nessuna PR unita negli ultimi 30g
Descrizione
This is just to document the case. I don't have an suggestion on how to handle this; nor do I think it's important to handle now.
---
Sometimes there are informal sidewalks next to a road.
If those are mapped, marking them as `informal=yes` (DE: Trampelpfad) is a feasable tagging.
I am not clear on what the right `sidewalk`-value be in this case. It seems similar to the situation of https://trafficsigns.osm-verkehrswende.org/DE?signs=DE:239,1022-10 where bikes are allowed to use the (pedestrian) sidewalk (at walking speed) but this is not considered bike infra so it still gets a cycleway:SIDE=no on the centerline.
For the sake of routing, it would be better to recognize those `informal=yes` "`is_sidepath`" as some kind of infra and not generate a virtual sidewalk.
---
Examples
* https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1007134506/history
(Note I just changed the tagging to improve it a bit: better highway class `footway` but especially `is_sidepath`)
* There are more cases in this general area where the "sidewalk" is a dirt path
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/4935223 In this case someone marked them as `sidewalk=both`
Guida per i contributori
Nessuna guida per i contributori indicizzata per questo repository
Valutazione
Questa issue non è ancora stata valutata.