[Tagging] Pedestrian access tagging

Mateusz Konieczny matkoniecz at tutanota.com
Sat Jan 23 18:24:54 UTC 2021

Jan 23, 2021, 18:51 by zelonewolf at gmail.com:

>> 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.
> How is this fact tagged/documented?  Are such roads tagged foot=no (as it is illegal) or is it assumed based on some other combination of tagging? 
foot=no is used not only for explicit signage[1], but also for "illegal due to fact that pedestrian
there would obstruct traffic and would be a deadly danger".

What is also not ideal as interpretation of this rule is at least partially subjective[2].

But it solves at least cases like this one from Sweden, even I would not argue that
walking on carriageway would not fall under this rule.

[1] though "no pedestrians" and "no cyclists" signs is used quite widely, also in places where it
is not reasonable to outlaw such access - ending with opposite unsolved problem, how to
handle "illegal but feasible to use and commonly used this way as there is no sane alternative"

[2] what worse actual law is catchall rule "who blocks or obstructs traffic(...)" that
can be twisted to be defined extremely broadly...

"Art. 90 kodeksu wykroczeń Kto tamuje lub utrudnia ruch na drodze publicznej,
 w strefie zamieszkania lub strefie ruchu, podlega karze grzywny albo karze nagany."

Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer. Maybe I am wrong and walking on such road is actually
legal in Poland. 

Polish traffic laws are not known for being reasonable, without self-contradictions,
well constructed and easy to interpret.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20210123/70013413/attachment.htm>

More information about the Tagging mailing list