[Tagging] Mapping area of pedestrian crossing

Mateusz Konieczny matkoniecz at tutanota.com
Tue May 18 12:01:37 UTC 2021

May 18, 2021, 08:36 by minh at nguyen.cincinnati.oh.us:

> Vào lúc 10:48 2021-05-17, Georg đã viết:
>> Hi Mateusz,
>>> In some cases people may want to map pedestrian crossing
>>> also as an area.
>>> For example see
>>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/655343334
>>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/655410319
>>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/654981687
>> Without knowing the 3 objects in situ, in maps and aerial imagery they
>> do look like 3 usual crossings. Like all crossings, they do have a
>> certain length and width, i.e. as geometric shape, all crosssings are
>> not a line but an area (mostly squares) just like streets, waterways
>> etc. But in OSM sense, why shall these 3 not seen as line but areas?
>> I'd better understand "area" for crossings like
>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/50.00152/8.25936 which in contrast
>> to an X-crossing (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedestrian_scramble)
>> has not just 6 lines interconnecting 4 points, but where you can go from
>> any point to any point.
> Aside from pedestrian scrambles, I frequently encounter opportunities to map crossing areas in the parking lots of big box stores such as Walmart in the U.S. A crosshatched area may run along the perimeter road of a parking lot, spanning the intersections of multiple parking aisles. Here are some examples that I and others have mapped as area:highway=footway footway=crossing, by analogy with linear crossing ways
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/944121524 (clearest in Bing imagery)
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/657494224 (Mapbox or OSIP 6in imagery)
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/944124257 (Mapbox or OSIP 6in, note the nonrectangular shape)
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/944128107 (Bing, note adjacent linear crossing)
> If these crossings or pedestrian scrambles can be represented as areas, then I see no reason why more linear crossings couldn't also be represented as areas as a form of micromapping. However, linear crossings should also be represented by highway=footway ways, just as highway=residential would need to accompany any area:highway=residential.
I really like
area:highway=footway footway=crossing
tagging, maybe I switch to this one.

(if entire idea of tagging such features is a bad idea then it is the best moment to protest and
explain why)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20210518/af782556/attachment.htm>

More information about the Tagging mailing list