[Talk-us] [Imports] Proposing import of sidewalk data Seattle, WA, USA

Paul Johnson baloo at ursamundi.org
Tue Aug 9 11:50:49 UTC 2016


On Tue, Aug 2, 2016 at 10:59 AM, Clifford Snow <clifford at snowandsnow.us>
wrote:

>
> On Tue, Aug 2, 2016 at 6:01 AM, Frederik Ramm <frederik at remote.org> wrote:
>
>>    sidewalk tagging in OSM is a complex issue. The fact that sidewalks
>> are not tagged as individual geometries is not purely a shortcoming,  it
>> is a compromise that keeps OSM data editable. Having individual
>> geometries for every single sidewalk on the planet will not only
>> massively increase the data volume but also require new and better tools
>> for editing, e.g. moving the geometry of a street without having to move
>> three parallel lines manually and so on.
>>
>
> Frederik, I thought you were for only add objects that can be surveyed on
> the ground? Isn't that what they are proposing?
>
> We tell people not to map for the renderer. In the same spirit shouldn't
> we tell people not to let the limitations of the editor stop them from
> mapping?
>

I tend to agree, particularly for pedestrian modes.  Sidewalks and
pedestrian crossings are pretty easy to verify even from the air and this
will be at least rational for most automated routing systems and a good
starting point (even if it means multiple ways per street, short of some
form of lanes type tagging, which I think gets messy for things like
sidewalks that have a curb (or more severe) barrier).   It does give the
most reasonable routing assumption (that is, you can't just freerun
midblock from sidewalk to sidewalk).  Most routing engines will figure it
out fairly quickly if you do this anyway, however (and any highly-tuned
routing engine should be able to make an educated guess by context anyway).
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/attachments/20160809/1bcff54a/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Talk-us mailing list