<html xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=Windows-1252">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#954F72;
text-decoration:underline;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;}
@page WordSection1
{size:612.0pt 792.0pt;
margin:72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style>
</head>
<body lang="EN-GB" link="blue" vlink="#954F72">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal">A surprising number of the new build housing estates around me have few pavements and are not very contiguous. There’s often even a space where they could lay the asphalt, but then it’s left as grass – before then getting sequestered as
cars park over it.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">I’d like to see more affirmative mapping of sidewalks. Starting with it being a suggested tag in the iD editor, and other editors.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Similar to how you can just toggle an option to add the lit, tunnel, bridge, etc. parameters for roads. Manually adding sidewalk:both/left/right=yes/no is overlooked.
</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Maps are so car centric, and walking directions are stuck with disclaimers along the lines of ‘we don’t know how suitable this route is to walk, good luck!’.
</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">I hope we can improve upon that.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Gareth</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="border:none;padding:0cm"><b>From: </b><a href="mailto:jez.nicholson@gmail.com">Jez Nicholson</a><br>
<b>Sent: </b>01 June 2019 11:39<br>
<b>To: </b><a href="mailto:Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org">Talk-GB</a><br>
<b>Subject: </b>Re: [Talk-GB] sidewalks</p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Agree with both Gareth and Dan. It's all part of the discussion on how detailed the map goes, and possibly more relevant in countries with wider roads and obviously separate sidewalks. In the UK we always assume that a road has a pavement
unless stated otherwise. I came slightly unstuck myself when walking from a guesthouse to an office in Exeter and having to drag a wheelie case along a grass verge :)<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Happy for them to be added in special cases like raised pavements, but when they are exactly next to the road it doesn't really add much.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Like with the relation I was also whining about, i'm not going to go removing anything, but I did comment on the sidewalk changeset to take care.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On Sat, Jun 1, 2019 at 11:28 AM Dan S <<a href="mailto:danstowell%2Bosm@gmail.com">danstowell+osm@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:4.8pt">I noticed a "sidewalk" here too in Brighton:<br>
<a href="https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/684610225" target="_blank">https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/684610225</a><br>
<br>
I'm ambivalent. Both of these examples are pavements that are fully<br>
adjacent (continguous) to their roads, and by default I'd prefer not<br>
to map them separately. I guess the long one that you refer to does<br>
sometimes rise above the road, and even has steps down at at least one<br>
point, so perhaps worth being a separate feature?<br>
<br>
Dan<br>
<br>
Op za 1 jun. 2019 om 11:12 schreef Jez Nicholson <<a href="mailto:jez.nicholson@gmail.com" target="_blank">jez.nicholson@gmail.com</a>>:<br>
><br>
> Brighton has also just gained a sidewalk <a href="https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/JAn" target="_blank">
https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/JAn</a> which i'm not overly impressed with....or am I being a Luddite?<br>
><br>
> Regards,<br>
> Jez<br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> Talk-GB mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank">Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org</a><br>
> <a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb" target="_blank">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb</a><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
</body>
</html>