[Tagging] Proposal for standardization of sidewalk schema (+ import)

markus schnalke meillo at marmaro.de
Thu Aug 4 05:15:51 UTC 2016

[2016-08-03 19:35] Mike Thompson <miketho16 at gmail.com>
> On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 5:49 AM, markus schnalke <meillo at marmaro.de> wrote:
>     So, if mapping sidewalks is a lot of effort (kerbs and such), there
>     will be few motivation to do it at all. Having it as trivial as
>     possible increases the probability of users doing it.
> I tested out the proposed mapping/tagging scheme in my local area (http://
> www.openstreetmap.org/#map=17/40.49192/-105.05655 - not claiming I did it
> perfectly). I didn't think it was especially difficult. Drawing the additional
> ways took a little more time, but offered the advantage that you received a
> good visual as to whether all the sidewalks had been correctly mapped. 

Thanks for sharing your experiences!

The visibility is surely an advantage. (btw: Is there a map style
that shows sidwalk=*?)

One more aspect to consider: In my eyes, the level of mapping
details and their exactness and completeness should correlate. If
something is mapped in a detailed style, one will likely assume
that it is very exact and almost complete as well.

If I just know something from memory or my notes are not
complete, I wouldn't want to use detailed mapping. To map the
sidewalk as separate way with a good feeling requires much more
detailed notes and more certainty about the exactness and
completeness of the situation. If I'm in doubt, I wouldn't want
to map in a detailed style, in order to not imply the exactness.
But knowing that the sidewalk was on the right side is still
valuable information IMO, just a bit rougher. It requires less
notes when being at the place and implies less exactness and
completeness. This is similar to building=yes vs. building=<!yes>,
or tracks having tracktype=* and smoothness=*.

Mapping in a ``rough'' style is better than mapping with false
exactness ... and better too than not mapping something at all.
(At least in my area, which still is pretty sparsely mapped.)

I think it's an advantage that we have the possibility to map
on different levels of exactness/completeness/detail.


More information about the Tagging mailing list