[Tagging] Pedestrian access tagging

Volker Schmidt voschix at gmail.com
Mon Jan 25 13:06:39 UTC 2021


Please do not change definition of widely-used tags.
This creates only confusion. highway=motorway has to stay without changes.
The correct way is to invite mappers to explicitly add foot|bicycle=yes in
well-defined areas only.

On Mon, 25 Jan 2021, 13:37 Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging, <
tagging at openstreetmap.org> wrote:

>
>
>
> Jan 25, 2021, 01:02 by baloo at ursamundi.org:
>
> On Sun, Jan 24, 2021 at 5:07 PM Brian M. Sperlongano <zelonewolf at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> The wiki definition for highway=motorway says that foot=no (and others)
> are implied.
>
>
> Yeah, it might be time for the wiki to revisit that position since it
> varies enough to say that you should always tag the explicit mode access
> where known.
>
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dmotorway#Implied_values
>
> I added:
>
>
> In some places areas some highway=motorway allow cyclists and pedestrians
> (on a shoulder).
> It means that explicit foot=no, bicycle=no, shoulder=yes may be useful
> even if seemingly obvious[1].
>
> [1]
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2021-January/thread.html#58857
> - about
> pedestrian access on major roads, includes discussion of feasibility,
> legality and sanity of
> pedestrian traffic on roads, up to and including motorways and revealed
> that explicit tagging of
> pedestrian access may be useful even on motorways
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20210125/fcaa0907/attachment.htm>


More information about the Tagging mailing list