[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Pedestrian lane

Markus selfishseahorse at gmail.com
Mon Nov 25 10:13:12 UTC 2019


On Sun, 24 Nov 2019 at 23:19, Paul Allen <pla16021 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Depends on jurisdiction too (if I'm following all this correctly, which I may not be).  In
> some jurisdictions, crossing is legal only at specified crossings and they tend to
> be frequent.  In other jurisdictions, like the UK, crossing is legal almost anywhere, but
> there may also be (infrequent) designated crossings.

The examples in my previous message are from 30 km/h zones in
Switzerland, where there are no marked or signalised pedestrian
crossings except near schools or homes for senior or handicapped
people and where pedestrians therefore are allowed to cross the road
everywhere. The general rule here is that pedestrians must use a
designated pedestrian crossing, underpass or bridge if there is one
within 50 m. [1] As far as i know, the situation is similar in other
countries that follow the Vienna Convention on Road Signs and Signals,
except that the distance varies (often being 100 m).

[1]: https://www.admin.ch/opc/fr/classified-compilation/19620246/index.html#a47

> I'm a little worried we could end up with the situation in the UK where it is legal for me to
> cross the road where I am but the routeing engine tells me I have to walk a mile to a
> designated crossing then walk a mile back.  That can probably be solved by adding
> jurisdiction heuristics to routeing engines.  But it needs to be thought about before
> we paint ourselves into any corners.

That's exactly the big problem with sidewalks being mapped as separate
ways in areas where there are no or few designated pedestrian
crossings and where it is allowed to cross the road everywhere. Even
when, at intersections, you map unmarked crossings that are logical
continuations of the sidewalks (which are more or less verifiable
because used by many people) (example [2]), you still get unnatural
routes that are long detours (example [3]). At least in these areas,
mapping sidewalks (and pedestrian lanes) with separate ways seems more
problematical than tagging them on the street way.

[2]: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/536404830
[3]: https://www.openstreetmap.org/directions?engine=fossgis_osrm_foot&route=46.93737%2C7.44928%3B46.93757%2C7.44893

Regards

Markus



More information about the Tagging mailing list