[OSM-talk] Pedestrian crossings and barriers

80n 80n80n at gmail.com
Wed Aug 1 21:12:46 BST 2007

On 8/1/07, Andy Allan <gravitystorm at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 8/1/07, Alex Mauer <hawke at hawkesnest.net> wrote:
> > Peter Miller wrote:
> > > crossing=footbridge
> > > crossing=foottunnel
> > > crossing=cyclebridge
> > > crossing=cycletunnel
> >
> > These make some sense, but don't we already have tags that cover all
> > these use cases?  I don't even know that we need to tag them as
> > crossings, since they shouldn't even have nodes at the "intersection"
> > since the roads don't intersect.
> Since we don't mark in pavements (sidewalks), I've found some crossing
> hard to mark. It's all right to mark in a footbridge (as a footway on
> layer=1, with steps) - but when there's no pavements, what do we
> connect the paths to? A simple tag on a node helps do things like this
> quickly, and that's better than it not being marked at all.

+1, except that the editors (JOSM and Potlatch) need to show a visible
difference between nodes with and without tags.  It's all to easy to  remove
seemingly redundant nodes from ways without realising that they contain
important tags.

Nodes with tags (other than created_by) need to be displayed in a different

> Andy
> _______________________________________________
> talk mailing list
> talk at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20070801/f939e9d8/attachment.html>

More information about the talk mailing list