<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<p>Hey all,<br>
</p>
<p>again and again there are discussions about which parts of a
street (sidewalks and cycle paths, parking lanes, carriageway)
should be considered when determining the width of a street. There
does not seem to be a consensus and therefore information on
street widths is difficult to interpret or is not even mapped. The
following variants are common/are discussed:</p>
<p>1) Width of the actual carriageway, without parking lanes and
sidewalks<br>
2) Width between curbs / edges of the road without sidewalks, but
with parked cars when they are on street<br>
3) Width including sidewalks / roadside paths<br>
</p>
<p>I tend to option 2):<br>
- The width can be clearly defined and measured<br>
- The width of the actual carriageway can be determined by using
"parking:lane" scheme correctly (or alternatively/supplementarily
by specifying the width of parking lanes). "width:carriageway" (or
"width:lanes", if there are marked lanes) also could be used to
map this width directly.<br>
- The width of roadside paths can optionally be specified with
"sidewalk:width" etc.<br>
</p>
<p>Wouldn't it be time to document a recommendation in the Wiki to
reduce further ambiguities? Which variant is the most
recommendable? Anyway, the width of a street is a significant
value to evaluate its suitability or safety for certain modes of
transport or to determine the speed that can be expected there.</p>
<p>Thanks for your comments,<br>
Alex<br>
</p>
</body>
</html>