[Tagging] Question reg. wheelchair mapping

Gerd Petermann gpetermann_muenchen at hotmail.com
Fri Jan 8 10:41:35 UTC 2016

dieterdreist wrote
> 2016-01-08 10:31 GMT+01:00 Marc Gemis <

> marc.gemis@

> >:
>> I have a question about this. I think I can recognise an access ramp
>> for wheelchair users when I see one. In general I don't know the
>> incline %, but I assume that it was designed in such a way that the
>> majority of wheelchair users can use it.
>> with highway=access_ramp (duck tagging) I indicate that the path was
>> designed for wheelchair users.
>> Don't I loose some information with
>> highway=footway, wheelchair=yes, incline=up ?
> Yes, some information is lost, because a footway, also an inclined one,
> can
> be any kind of geometry (it can be older than current building standards
> and not follow them), while a wheelchair ramp has to meet certain
> criteria,
> especially if it's publicly accessible. But I don't think we should be
> fragmentating the highway values for these either, in the end, it is a
> footway (or maybe bicycles are allowed as well?). What about an additional
> attribute, like wheelchair=ramp? Or wheelchair_ramp=yes? Btw., the tag
> highway=access_ramp doesn't specify that the ramp is built for
> wheelchairs.

Good points. 
We already have the tag ramp=* for ramps along highway=steps:
and it has a special 
but the typical steps are too steep for wheelchair ramps, so those are
additional - longer and less steeper - ways. 

As I said before, most of those ways are not only for wheelchairs, also for
or delivery of goods.
Maybe highway=service,service=ramp would be better than highway=footway?


View this message in context: http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/Question-reg-wheelchair-mapping-tp5864292p5864319.html
Sent from the Tagging mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

More information about the Tagging mailing list