[Talk-GB] Improving gate data

[Tom Crocker]

On Mon, 25 Apr 2022, 14:36 Jon Pennycook via Talk-GB, <
talk-gb at openstreetmap.org> wrote:

> Here's a good example - a barrier between two residential roads:-
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1742554854
>
> Jon
>
> On Mon, 25 Apr 2022 at 14:29, Jon Pennycook <jpennycook at bcs.org.uk> wrote:
>
>> I suspect the barriers that are particularly interesting are the ones
>> that block a certain class of user that would be allowed either side of the
>> barrier, eg a bollard or concrete block on a residential road would prevent
>> cars but not pedestrians for example, even though cars are allowed on
>> either side. In the case of the concrete block, it would matter if there
>> was a gap allowing horses and cyclists, or if it extended across the whole
>> road only leaving access to the pavement, in which case cycles and horses
>> would not be able to pass.
>>
>> Jon
>>
>
I think there's a couple of problems here. First, The use of access tags
for what's legal is emphasised on the wiki and I don't think there's
anywhere that says it's okay to use them to mean the physical passability
of a node, and indeed not using them to describe physical characteristics
is mentioned (presumably meaning ways). It's only really implicit in what
particular barriers imply.
Second, it's quite hard to do well. For gates I don't know of a simple way
of saying single track vehicles can probably squeeze through, double track
and horses can't. I'd also probably get it wrong! Near me are some
barrier=motorcycle_barrier or cycle_barrier=tilted depending on your style.
>From walking I thought I could ride my bike through them but I was very
wrong. That said my daughter could easily ride hers through.

Tom

>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/attachments/20220425/ae1ef07c/attachment.htm>