Question reg. wheelchair mapping

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
16 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Question reg. wheelchair mapping

Gerd Petermann

Hi all,


a few days ago I noticed that the "wheelchair routing" page seems to be quite out-aged.

This section

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Wheelchair_routing#Obstacles.2FAccessibility

states that a ramp for wheelchairs should be tagged highway=access_ramp

but this tag is rarely used and probably not well understood. In the German forum

we came to the conclusion that the corresponding proposal

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Access_Ramp


should be marked deprecated:

http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=53224


I'd like to see that the existing highway=access_ramp

are changed to the well known

highway=footway

wheelchair=yes

in combination with

incline=x%


after a review by local mappers

and that the wiki pages are changed accordingly.

If I hear no complains I'll change the english and german page

next sunday.


Gerd




_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Question reg. wheelchair mapping

Marc Gemis
>
> after a review by local mappers
>
> and that the wiki pages are changed accordingly.
>
> If I hear no complains I'll change the english and german page
>
> next sunday.

That's a pretty tight deadline. Wouldn't it be better to wait at least
1 or 2 weeks? Perhaps in the meantime, you could indicate on the page
that there is currently a discussion on the tagging mailing list.


regards

m

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Question reg. wheelchair mapping

Gerd Petermann
Marc Gemis wrote
>
> after a review by local mappers
>
> and that the wiki pages are changed accordingly.
>
> If I hear no complains I'll change the english and german page
>
> next sunday.

That's a pretty tight deadline. Wouldn't it be better to wait at least
1 or 2 weeks? Perhaps in the meantime, you could indicate on the page
that there is currently a discussion on the tagging mailing list.
You are right, no need to hurry with that. I've just noticed that the german
page request to contact user Astrid, so I'll do that first.

Gerd
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Question reg. wheelchair mapping

Gerd Petermann
Gerd Petermann wrote
Marc Gemis wrote
>
> after a review by local mappers
>
> and that the wiki pages are changed accordingly.
>
> If I hear no complains I'll change the english and german page
>
> next sunday.

That's a pretty tight deadline. Wouldn't it be better to wait at least
1 or 2 weeks? Perhaps in the meantime, you could indicate on the page
that there is currently a discussion on the tagging mailing list.
You are right, no need to hurry with that. I've just noticed that the german
page request to contact user Astrid, so I'll do that first.

Gerd
Sorry, was too quick. It turned out that Astrid seems no longer active.
I've added the hints regarding the discussion for now.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Question reg. wheelchair mapping

Marc Gemis
In reply to this post by Gerd Petermann
On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 9:45 AM, Gerd Petermann
<[hidden email]> wrote:

> I'd like to see that the existing highway=access_ramp
>
> are changed to the well known
>
> highway=footway
>
> wheelchair=yes
>
> in combination with
>
> incline=x%


I have a question about this. I think I can recognise an access ramp
for wheelchair users when I see one. In general I don't know the
incline %, but I assume that it was designed in such a way that the
majority of wheelchair users can use it.

with highway=access_ramp (duck tagging) I indicate that the path was
designed for wheelchair users.

Don't I loose some information with

highway=footway, wheelchair=yes, incline=up ?

regards

m

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Question reg. wheelchair mapping

Gerd Petermann
Marc Gemis wrote
On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 9:45 AM, Gerd Petermann
<[hidden email]> wrote:
> I'd like to see that the existing highway=access_ramp
>
> are changed to the well known
>
> highway=footway
>
> wheelchair=yes
>
> in combination with
>
> incline=x%


I have a question about this. I think I can recognise an access ramp
for wheelchair users when I see one. In general I don't know the
incline %, but I assume that it was designed in such a way that the
majority of wheelchair users can use it.

with highway=access_ramp (duck tagging) I indicate that the path was
designed for wheelchair users.

Don't I loose some information with

highway=footway, wheelchair=yes, incline=up ?
I think duck tagging would mean highway=wheelchair_ramp?
Those ramps are also often used to deliver goods using rolling boxes.

In fact I think that highway=access_ramp is not that bad, it just isn't used very often
(Taginfo says 85 today : http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/highway#values)
and I would assume that many public buildings have one, so most mappers either
don't map those ramps or they use another tag for it.

Gerd

Gerd
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Question reg. wheelchair mapping

dieterdreist
In reply to this post by Marc Gemis

2016-01-08 10:31 GMT+01:00 Marc Gemis <[hidden email]>:
I have a question about this. I think I can recognise an access ramp
for wheelchair users when I see one. In general I don't know the
incline %, but I assume that it was designed in such a way that the
majority of wheelchair users can use it.

with highway=access_ramp (duck tagging) I indicate that the path was
designed for wheelchair users.

Don't I loose some information with

highway=footway, wheelchair=yes, incline=up ?



Yes, some information is lost, because a footway, also an inclined one, can be any kind of geometry (it can be older than current building standards and not follow them), while a wheelchair ramp has to meet certain criteria, especially if it's publicly accessible. But I don't think we should be fragmentating the highway values for these either, in the end, it is a footway (or maybe bicycles are allowed as well?). What about an additional attribute, like wheelchair=ramp? Or wheelchair_ramp=yes? Btw., the tag highway=access_ramp doesn't specify that the ramp is built for wheelchairs.

Cheers,
Martin

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Question reg. wheelchair mapping

Gerd Petermann
dieterdreist wrote
2016-01-08 10:31 GMT+01:00 Marc Gemis <[hidden email]>:

> I have a question about this. I think I can recognise an access ramp
> for wheelchair users when I see one. In general I don't know the
> incline %, but I assume that it was designed in such a way that the
> majority of wheelchair users can use it.
>
> with highway=access_ramp (duck tagging) I indicate that the path was
> designed for wheelchair users.
>
> Don't I loose some information with
>
> highway=footway, wheelchair=yes, incline=up ?
>



Yes, some information is lost, because a footway, also an inclined one, can
be any kind of geometry (it can be older than current building standards
and not follow them), while a wheelchair ramp has to meet certain criteria,
especially if it's publicly accessible. But I don't think we should be
fragmentating the highway values for these either, in the end, it is a
footway (or maybe bicycles are allowed as well?). What about an additional
attribute, like wheelchair=ramp? Or wheelchair_ramp=yes? Btw., the tag
highway=access_ramp doesn't specify that the ramp is built for wheelchairs.
Good points.
We already have the tag ramp=* for ramps along highway=steps:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:ramp
and it has a special
ramp:wheelchair=yes
but the typical steps are too steep for wheelchair ramps, so those are normally
additional - longer and less steeper - ways.

As I said before, most of those ways are not only for wheelchairs, also for strollers
or delivery of goods.
Maybe highway=service,service=ramp would be better than highway=footway?

Gerd
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Question reg. wheelchair mapping

Philip Barnes


On Fri Jan 8 10:41:35 2016 GMT, Gerd Petermann wrote:


>
> Good points.
> We already have the tag ramp=* for ramps along highway=steps:
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:ramp
> and it has a special
> ramp:wheelchair=yes
> but the typical steps are too steep for wheelchair ramps, so those are
> normally
> additional - longer and less steeper - ways.
>
> As I said before, most of those ways are not only for wheelchairs, also for
> strollers
What is a stroller?

> or delivery of goods.
> Maybe highway=service,service=ramp would be better than highway=footway?
>
They are also used by prams and pushchairs, mobility scooters  and I use them when I drag my wheeled suitcase to the station.

Actually seeing  manual wheelchairs outdoors is very rare, mobility scooters on the other hand are very common.

 The ramps are often textured so that visually handicapped people can tell that it is a crossing and if its controlled or not.

Phil (trigpoint)
--
Sent from my Jolla
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Question reg. wheelchair mapping

dieterdreist
In reply to this post by Gerd Petermann

2016-01-08 11:41 GMT+01:00 Gerd Petermann <[hidden email]>:
ramp:wheelchair=yes


good finding, why not use this together with highway=footway?
It's used more than 2300 times: http://taginfo.osm.org/keys/ramp%3Awheelchair
 

but the typical steps are too steep for wheelchair ramps, so those are
normally
additional - longer and less steeper - ways.


yes

 

As I said before, most of those ways are not only for wheelchairs, also for
strollers
or delivery of goods.
Maybe highway=service,service=ramp would be better than highway=footway?


no, they are almost never suitable for 2-tracked vehicles (too narrow), so highway=service would be a mistagging. You can't deliver goods with a vehicle typically. They are of course used by everyone who finds it more comfy to avoid the steps, but the raison d'être are wheelchairs (and also the parameters use to design the standards).

Of course there are also delivery ramps, but these aren't wheelchair ramps (but could make the latter unnecessary). Those would best be tagged as service (and maybe service=driveway).

Cheers,
Martin

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Question reg. wheelchair mapping

Tom Pfeifer
In reply to this post by dieterdreist
Martin Koppenhoefer wrote on 2016/01/08 11:23:
>
> 2016-01-08 10:31 GMT+01:00 Marc Gemis:
[...]
>     with highway=access_ramp (duck tagging) I indicate that the path was
>     designed for wheelchair users.
>
>     Don't I loose some information with
>
>     highway=footway, wheelchair=yes, incline=up ?
>
> Yes, some information is lost, because a footway, also an inclined one,
 > can be any kind of geometry (it can be older than current building standards
 > and not follow them), while a wheelchair ramp has to meet certain criteria,
 > especially if it's publicly accessible. But I don't think we should be
 > fragmentating the highway values for these either, in the end, it is a footway
 > (or maybe bicycles are allowed as well?). What about an additional attribute,
 > like wheelchair=ramp? Or wheelchair_ramp=yes? Btw., the
> tag highway=access_ramp doesn't specify that the ramp is built for wheelchairs.

+1 for keeping that a highway=footway with extra tags for the detail. I often walk
on them when they lead in my direction and the stairs don't, i.e. they should be
included in vanilla pedestrian routing.

As wheelchair=* is used with pretty wide definition range coming from wheelmaps.org,
I'd prefer the distinguished description with "wheelchair_ramp=yes".

And thanks Gerd btw for keeping an eye on those efforts of highway cleaning.

Gerd Petermann wrote on 2016/01/08 11:41:
 > Maybe highway=service,service=ramp would be better than highway=footway?

The beauty of having a separate tag for the ramp property is that is can be
applied to different highway types. If is is just as wide as a footway, tag
it footway, if trucks can use it, tag it service.

tom

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Question reg. wheelchair mapping

dieterdreist

2016-01-08 12:28 GMT+01:00 Tom Pfeifer <[hidden email]>:
if trucks can use it, tag it service.


yes, but don't tag it wheelchair ramp then. ;-)

Cheers,
Martin



_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Question reg. wheelchair mapping

Andy Townsend
In reply to this post by Gerd Petermann
On 08/01/2016 08:45, Gerd Petermann wrote:

I'd like to see that the existing highway=access_ramp

are changed to the well known

highway=footway

wheelchair=yes

in combination with

incline=x%



The explicit "wheelchair=yes" would definitely be needed with those tags as they don't make it clear that it's suitable for negotiation by a "large wheeled object" - a steep footpath with corners that weren't negotiable by a wheelchair could still be tagged with an incline like that.

Have you tried contacting any of the consumers of the "access_ramp" data?  I'm assuming that none (or almost none) of them will read the tagging list; the DE forum will find a few, but a small portion of the number internationally.

Cheers,

Andy


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Question reg. wheelchair mapping

dieterdreist

2016-01-08 15:35 GMT+01:00 Andy Townsend <[hidden email]>:
a steep footpath with corners that weren't negotiable by a wheelchair could still be tagged with an incline like that.


a steep way is never suitable for wheelchairs, at least not according to construction standards (e.g. in Germany, 6% is the maximum admitted incline, which is 6 meters height for every 100 meters projected length, and even then you have to provide horizontal landings every 6 meters). On the other hand, sharp corners aren't a problem, a wheelchair can rotate on the spot, standards require a diameter of 1,50 m, but actual wheelchairs might be smaller.


cheers,
Martin

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Question reg. wheelchair mapping

Gerd Petermann
In reply to this post by Andy Townsend
Andy Townsend wrote
Have you tried contacting any of the consumers of the "access_ramp"
data?  I'm assuming that none (or almost none) of them will read the
tagging list; the DE forum will find a few, but a small portion of the
number internationally.
:-(
My hope was to get in contact with them via these posts.
If that doesn't work I'll try other ways.

Gerd
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Question reg. wheelchair mapping

John F. Eldredge
In reply to this post by dieterdreist
The width is important as well.  I have been on footpaths that slanted downward across the face of a steep incline.  The slope of the path was moderate, but the path was only about half a meter wide, with 45-degree slopes above and below the path.  A person on foot could navigate the path (preferably with the aid of a walking stick), but a wheelchair user would be risking their life on that path.

On 01/08/2016 09:08 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:

2016-01-08 15:35 GMT+01:00 Andy Townsend <[hidden email]>:
a steep footpath with corners that weren't negotiable by a wheelchair could still be tagged with an incline like that.


a steep way is never suitable for wheelchairs, at least not according to construction standards (e.g. in Germany, 6% is the maximum admitted incline, which is 6 meters height for every 100 meters projected length, and even then you have to provide horizontal landings every 6 meters). On the other hand, sharp corners aren't a problem, a wheelchair can rotate on the spot, standards require a diameter of 1,50 m, but actual wheelchairs might be smaller.


cheers,
Martin


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging