[Tagging] Continuous Sidewalk or Cycleway

Peter Elderson pelderson at gmail.com
Sat Jan 25 14:17:43 UTC 2020

Florimond Berthoux <florimond.berthoux at gmail.com>:

> With a table the pedestrians have to cross the road, it is the opposite
> for the continuous sidewalk that's why I'm in favor to add a new value

Well, any crossing involves different ways crossing each other, and should
be considered from all angles involved. A way can't cross another way
without being crossed itself.

> Give ways:
> If there is traffic sign or painting you can add a give way tag.
> If there is none, you cannot add a give way, or you would interpret the
> law which is not on the ground.
> Crossing:
> I thought of using crossing key but there are issues:
> - the tag is only for pedestrians crossing the road, where as a continuous
> sidewalk is a sidewalk cross by cars (though we could change the definition
> of crossing to embrace more situations)

I would not even consider that a change: as said above,  a way can't cross
another way without being crossed by the other way.

> - continuous cycleways exist too (and it’s the main reason I’d like to tag
> them)

In Nederland, cycleways tend to be continuous by design, but that does not
imply anything. All the regular traffic rules apply. Only continuous
pedestrian surface (including elevation, pavement, lining) is significant.
It is in effect a pedestrian area or living street, where other traffic is
tolerated but has no rights. Also, traffic coming from an area like that
has no priority whatsoever. Movements of vehicles on the pavement are
considered "special manoeuvres" and the driver has to give way to all

> - it collides with continuous sidewalk, you may have continuous sidewalk
> and a crossing, it’s not a normal case but I have at least one example in
> Paris where zebras were added on a continuous sidewalk, hence the need for
> another tag.

This would just be extra lining to emphasize priority for pedestrians. It
looks like a zebra but It would still be a "continuous_sidewalk" crossing.
Calling it a zebra crossing while it is continuous sidewalk would send the
wrong message.

For the moment my concern is about would it be possible to have tag
> collision with junction.
> And I just realize that a cycleway can be a junction=roundabout, and being
> continuous at the intersection with roads in and out of the roundabout.

That is very common around here for cycleways around a roundabout, but it
doesn't mean anything unless traffic signs (stop signs, give_way signs or
shark's teeth) are present. Pedestrian roundabouts, .i.e. continous sidwalk
around a roundabout, I have never seen that, but if present, it would imply
absolute priority for pedestrians and nothing for cyclists!

> So I guess we have to create a key.
I don't see how that follows from your arguments!
A node on the way where it crosses the middle line of the continuous
pavement (whether drawn as a way or not) tagged with either
traffic_calming=continous_sidewalk or crossing=continuous_sidewalk) covers
all cases mentioned, I think. Just an extra value.

I think that would be enough for basic rendering, routing and
traffic-oriented maps.

> _______________________________________________
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
> --
> Florimond Berthoux
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20200125/8224f6e2/attachment.htm>

More information about the Tagging mailing list