[Tagging] footway=crossing in detailed tagging

[Volker Schmidt]

This is, at least in some cases, more complicated.
Take a road that has a parallel segregated foot-cycle path and the crossing
itself is a segregated foot-cycle path, as in these two examples:
https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/S6U2AoBM5Q3jI3b-hKP5_A
https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/x-7IO3FbbtFLB0NKpCZSUQ
As shown in the two images they come also in two variants (same street!)
which illustrate the point I want to make: the pedestrian crossing crosses
also the bicycle part of the foot-cycle sidepath, i.e. crossing pedestrians
have priority also over the cyclists.
I would say the the crossing should be mapped to the joining point of the
ways.

On Sun, 15 Dec 2019 at 17:16, Markus <selfishseahorse at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Mateusz!
>
> On Sun, 15 Dec 2019 at 12:32, Mateusz Konieczny <matkoniecz at tutanota.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > Let's say that we have footway mapped separately from the road, road has
> footways on both sides.
> >
> > Footway has surface=paving_stones, road has surface=asphalt.
> >
> > There is a crossing, made from three ways:
> > - (1) highway=footway surface=paving_stones (for a bit from centerline
> of sidewalk to the curb)
> > - (2) highway=footway surface=asphalt (for part on the carriageway)
> > - (3) again highway=footway surface=paving_stones for part from curb to
> the centerline
> >
> > How footway=crossing tag should be applied?
> >
> > To all three or just carriageway surface - (2) segment?
>
> The same question came up in the ongoing discussion "Feature Proposal
> - RFC - footway=link".
>
> Strictly speaking, the pedestrian crossing goes from kerb to kerb. The
> two extra ways (1 and 3) are only needed because we map roads and
> paths as lines for simplification and routers. The question is how to
> tag these extra ways. They aren't sidewalks, as there is only one
> sidewalk running parallel to the street. Because of a lack of an
> alternative and for simplification, i've always extended the
> footway=crossing to the centre of the sidewalks (i.e.,
> footway=sidewalk). But it seems that footway=link (or how the tag
> finally will be called) is a possibility to tag the extra ways 1 and
> 3.
>
> The whole discussion "Feature Proposal - RFC - footway=link" can be found
> here:
>
>
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2019-November/thread.html#49311
>
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2019-December/thread.html#49527
>
> Regards
>
> Markus
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20191215/45503cad/attachment.html>