osm at inbox.org
Fri Aug 27 14:05:56 BST 2010
On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 5:36 AM, Nathan Edgars II <neroute2 at gmail.com> wrote:
> One real problem with routing along
> sidewalks is that they sometimes don't have curb cuts at
> intersections, yet it's legal to cross there. Example:
> To route correctly here, you'd either have to draw an incorrect
> footway, or the router would need to be able to "jump" a gap if
> there's no barrier (and you don't tell it you're in a wheelchair).
I see how that's a problem. However, I'd say the best solution is to
just pick some unique way to describe it, and then it can be retagged
later when we can come up with a better scheme.
Really, this is one of those situations that's going to require editor
and/or API improvements to map correctly. But get the data in the db,
and the situation can be better analyzed.
On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 9:03 AM, Nathan Edgars II <neroute2 at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 9:00 AM, Anthony <osm at inbox.org> wrote:
>>> Then why map the sidewalks at all, if you're just going to put them
>>> next to every road whether or not one exists?
>> You can't legally walk next to every road.
> That's what foot=no is for.
What if you can walk on the road, but not next to it?
More information about the Tagging