[Tagging] Continuous Sidewalk or Cycleway

Peter Elderson pelderson at gmail.com
Sat Jan 25 17:34:48 UTC 2020

Ah, I see. You are talking about cycling on the sidewalk. Indeed, very
unusual in Nederland. To me it's strange to tag continuous_sidewalk mainly
for cycling.

You talk of junction=continuous_sidewalk, I see no reason to even consider
If you have a cycleway, footway or footcycleway around a roundabout, it
still has crossings with the roads.which can and often will differ, so IMO
the crossing nodes would carry the attributes.

Well, I have given my thoughts, good luck with the proposal!

Best, Peter Elderson

Op za 25 jan. 2020 om 17:28 schreef Florimond Berthoux <
florimond.berthoux at gmail.com>:

> Le sam. 25 janv. 2020 à 15:19, Peter Elderson <pelderson at gmail.com> a
> écrit :
>> 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
>> traffic_calming=continuous_sidewalk
>> 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.
> Crossing key is defined as such «This tag is used for more accurately
> describing specific types of pedestrian crossings across roads»
> Continuous sidewalk is a sidewalk, so pedestrian don't cross a road but a
> sidewalk, so crossing key cannot be applied.
>> 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
>> others.
> Yes in Netherland you don't know what crossing a kurb every 50m on bicycle
> means, but there is a difference of having the cycleway going down to join
> the level of the road and crossing it than having the cycleway staying
> higher than the road on a cycleway.
> not continuous :
> https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=52.10055&lng=5.086457999999993&z=18.24231017301564&pKey=ZoLEx4v54zKtpXwEAiT_nw&focus=photo
> 5m further continuous :
> https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=52.100289999999944&lng=5.086368999999991&z=18.24231017301564&pKey=_hSpfQK3eiU4HbKEEFePIw&focus=photo
> - 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.
> No, I want to tag both features, I not here to interpret the world, the
> law or else, I just want to say there is a continuous sidewalk with zebra
> on it.
>> 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.
> You'll not be able to tag a roundabout on the ways of a cycleway
> (junction=roundabout) and tag on the way of the continuous cycleway
> (junction=continuous_sidewalk) since it already have junction=roundabout,
> two feature on the same tag -> collision.
> --
> 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/a3d90fc0/attachment-0001.htm>

More information about the Tagging mailing list