[Talk-GB] Pavements (footways/sidewalks) mapped as pedestrian areas AND footways

[David Woolley]

On 24/12/2022 21:01, Jon Pennycook via Talk-GB wrote:
> In the Elsea Park area of Bourne in Lincolnshire, I can see pavements
> (footways/sidewalks) mapped twice - once as highway=footway and again as
> highway=pedestrian, and these (the ways on the map) are not reliably linked

My impression is that OSM generally has a problem with changing 
abstractions at different zoom levels.  I don't know how OS handle this 
in their map databases, but the problem here is that the user is trying 
to get the plan type view that appears on the sort of OS maps used for 
planning applications, to coexist with a much more route planning type 
abstraction.

It seems to be common to map footways over pedestrian areas, even though 
they don't exist on the ground.  I've given up arguing on these, as they 
will reappear if you remove them.  In my view, they are really mapping 
for the renderer; the argument is that, without them routers either 
don't route at all, or route around the edge of the area.

Although I've used them myself, I have misgivings about separated 
sidewalks,  because of the awkwardnesses where they begin and end, and 
because you end up with arbitrary crossing points which are often not on 
the ground, and generally only sample.  It may be too late to change, 
but there needs to be a better way of indicating that interchanging 
between two parallel constructs is permissible everywhere.