[Tagging] "width" on streets: Time for a recommendation

Supaplex supaplex at riseup.net
Mon Sep 14 18:34:08 UTC 2020

Hey all,

again and again there are discussions about which parts of a street
(sidewalks and cycle paths, parking lanes, carriageway) should be
considered when determining the width of a street. There does not seem
to be a consensus and therefore information on street widths is
difficult to interpret or is not even mapped. The following variants are
common/are discussed:

1) Width of the actual carriageway, without parking lanes and sidewalks
2) Width between curbs / edges of the road without sidewalks, but with
parked cars when they are on street
3) Width including sidewalks / roadside paths

I tend to option 2):
- The width can be clearly defined and measured
- The width of the actual carriageway can be determined by using
"parking:lane" scheme correctly (or alternatively/supplementarily by
specifying the width of parking lanes). "width:carriageway" (or
"width:lanes", if there are marked lanes) also could be used to map this
width directly.
- The width of roadside paths can optionally be specified with
"sidewalk:width" etc.

Wouldn't it be time to document a recommendation in the Wiki to reduce
further ambiguities? Which variant is the most recommendable? Anyway,
the width of a street is a significant value to evaluate its suitability
or safety for certain modes of transport or to determine the speed that
can be expected there.

Thanks for your comments,

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20200914/1937ee64/attachment.htm>

More information about the Tagging mailing list