[Talk-us] Fwd: Sidewalks as footpaths
dieterdreist at gmail.com
Thu May 8 15:23:40 UTC 2014
2014-05-08 16:32 GMT+02:00 Serge Wroclawski <emacsen at gmail.com>:
> 1. Why map sidewalks
> This is a judgement call. In NYC it's reasonable to assume that a road
> has a sidwalk. It would be better to map roads without sidwalks than
> roads with them, because a vast majority of roads have sidewalks.
> In DC, where I used to live, many roads did not have sidewalks, or
> only had sidewalks on one side of the street.
> Maybe where you are, it's closer to DC, or possibly even less. Or
> maybe you are trying to bright some light on the state of sidewalks in
> your area.
+1, generally I agree although there are more reasons, especially if you
want to record more than just sidewalk=yes/no, e.g. micromapping obstacles.
Where I live (not in the US) there are sometimes obstacles on the sidewalk
like bollards or there are very narrow spots (down to 30-40cm / 1ft) where
you have a hard time passing with a wheelchair or a babystroller. Mapping
these all to the main highway (=road) is problematic (you will get
complicated and direction dependent tags like footway:right:width) and will
require to split the road quite often in order not to apply the tag to road
sections where they don't apply to.
Also complex crossings can be mapped easier when explicit pedestrian
geometry is drawn, especially in situations where you cannot cross all
streets but only some.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Talk-us