[Tagging] "Feature Proposal - RFC - Sidewalk

Peter Wendorff wendorff at uni-paderborn.de
Mon Mar 21 17:12:08 GMT 2011

I agree that the schemes could possibly coexist.
What I'm missing currently at the option to tag sidewalks as tags at the 
main street (the option [1]) is the possibility to tag detailled crossings.
How to tag attributes of a e.g. zebra crossing differing between left 
and right of the way?
Including "namespaces" left and right might be okay at ways, but the 
crossing itself is usually tagged on a node of the way, if the sidewalks 
are not mapped separately.

The "hack" around that would be to map sidewalks separately around the 
crossings itself - but then there is no argument left to not do that 
everywhere in the city, too.

If anybody has a solution to tag crossings with tags only at the 
street's way, I would appreciate to learn more.

My target group are especially people with impairments - blind people or 
people with wheelchairs. Here curb heights (sloped_curb), tactile 
pavings (tactile_paving) and features of traffic signals are especially 


Am 21.03.2011 17:57, schrieb Josh Doe:
> Serge,
> I think we're really talking about two proposals here, both of which
> have merit. The linked proposal has been around for a while, and
> involves tagging the road to indicate the presence of a sidewalk walk
> on one or both sides of the road. David refers to this proposal as
> "deprecated" [1].
> What David proposed, and what I'm interested in, is mapping the
> sidewalk as a separate way from the road. This rough proposal is on
> his page here [2].
> I think both schemes can coexist. In cities, especially ones with
> regular grids, the first scheme might be preferable for simplicity.
> However David's scheme has advantages when sidewalks don't have a
> constant offset from the road, and if there is a desire for precise
> navigation. In my area of suburbia, I plan to use David's scheme.
> We should certainly link both together though, so users can determine
> what level of detail is appropriate.
> -Josh
> [1]: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Hanska/Sidewalk#Tagging_the_main_way_.28DEPRECATED.29
> [2]: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Hanska/Sidewalk#Mapping_as_a_separate_way
> On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 12:39 PM, Serge Wroclawski<emacsen at gmail.com>  wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 12:35 PM, David Paleino<dapal at debian.org>  wrote:
>>> On Mon, 21 Mar 2011 17:29:28 +0100, David Paleino wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 21 Mar 2011 12:17:10 -0400, Serge Wroclawski wrote:
>>>>> As per the discussion last week about Sidewalks, I'm re-opening the
>>>>> sidewalk proposal as per:
>>>>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Sidewalk
>>>>> We've already had some preliminary discussion on this tag and there's
>>>>> been very minimal disagreement, which is a good sign for its adoption.
>>>> NAK.
>>>> What I understood was that the first tagging example of my page was that [1]
>>>> was generally accepted.
>>> Erm.. ok, I hope it was understandable :)
>> I don't understand, so maybe you can elaborate.
>> David, you expressed some interest in this last week, and Josh
>> suggested that since you were so interested, you make the proposal,
>> but I didn't see anything, and I have a specific project I want to use
>> these tags, so I've gone ahead and done so.
>> If you have specific issues with the proposal, please bring them up
>> for discussion.
>> - Serge
>> _______________________________________________
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
>> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

More information about the Tagging mailing list