[Tagging] Pedestrian access tagging

Mateusz Konieczny matkoniecz at tutanota.com
Sat Jan 23 17:34:41 UTC 2021

Jan 23, 2021, 18:04 by zelonewolf at gmail.com:

> On Sat, Jan 23, 2021 at 10:14 AM Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging <> tagging at openstreetmap.org> > wrote:
>> And that is exactly why using foot=yes/no for legal access is preferable.
>> Different people will have different standards what counts as "reasonable for pedestrian use".
> So, are you saying that this road has legal pedestrian access in Sweden?  That seems hard to believe.  How would I know from the tagging that I can't send a pedestrian down this road?  Is additional tagging needed on this road?:
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/199230893
> https://goo.gl/maps/HLrQxu5Dh83aCxsL9

either needs to be tagged on road or treated as implicit on highway=trunk in Sweden

Not sure what is preferable.

Is there a chance that it is outright illegal for pedestrian to be there?
In Poland someone walking on such road would be breaking law, even
if such road would not be explicitly signed as forbidden for pedestrians.

> Or is it more that in Sweden, all trunk roads have no pedestrian access as a rule but this fact is apparently not documented anywhere that I've found (not even in the abandoned defaults proposal)?
No idea.

> My assumption is that a road is passable by pedestrians unless there is some kind of tagging that tells me otherwise.  If there are reliable rules such as "in country X, this tag means no pedestrian access", that is an annoying but perfectly workable rule from a router perspective.
I would treat


without sidewalk and shoulder tags as indicator that routing pedestrian there is a bad idea.

> Remember that highway=trunk/primary/etc tags are about a road's relative importance
I agree.

>  and say absolutely nothing about the physical characteristics of a road.
This is often correlated, but it depends on country.

And in this case physical characteristics of a road ARE partially tagged.

For roads without sidewalk tag and with either
lanes >= 4 (or lanes >=2 with oneway=yes)
maxspeed > 70

I would assume sidewalk=no and treat is as pedestrian-usable road only as last resort
and warn user that road may be unusable for walking.

> In many areas, including the Rhode Island example I gave, that particular road is the ONLY access to certain residential areas to the rest of the road network.  The question of pedestrian routability for those areas is the difference between those residential areas being routable to the rest of the world on foot, versus cut off from the outside world.
Is it solvable withexplicit sidewalk and shoulder tags?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20210123/814288f3/attachment.htm>

More information about the Tagging mailing list