[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Sidewalks as separate ways
josh at joshdoe.com
Fri Mar 25 15:32:58 GMT 2011
I agree, it is confusing. I've used the separate way method quite
extensively in a suburban (subdivision) area. Perhaps I could create
some illustrations, though since I'm not much of an artist it will
probably be just screenshots. In the meantime you can see my area
Note I am using sloped_curb=yes right now, but will likely change them
to kerb=lowered. I also haven't used relations yet, as my primary
interest is routing, however I'm not concerned about providing for
directions like "turn left on Roberts Parkway".
On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 11:07 AM, SomeoneElse
<lists at mail.atownsend.org.uk> wrote:
> Er - I'm confused.
> We've now got:
> and probably others.
> People were suggesting incorporating features of:
> (which redirects to Proposed features/House numbers/Karlsruhe Schema)
> And in addition to the discussion on this list there's a parallel discussion
> taking place here:
> I can understand
> (it's what I do now, although with "footway=" rather than "sidewalk=")
> What I don't yet understand is the workflow associated with the
> "Sidewalk_as_separate_way" proposal. Through the window I can see a road
> which has a (currently unmapped) footpath/sidewalk along both sides for part
> of its length and one side after that. Perhaps someone could explain (under
> the "Sidewalk_as_separate_way" proposal) I would map that? How do I
> indicate where the footpath/sidewalk is actually immediately adjacent to the
> road and where it isn't? What other ways or relations (in addition to the
> road) do I need to create?
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
More information about the Tagging